CHANGES m m: MMPI menus" or: f 4. mu mason. omwe'ns DUNNGV ~ . (I Tho-ls for tho Doom of Ph. D. MICHIGAN STATE UNWERSITY Edward Henry Sfenmngor . _ 7 : I957 ‘~,"77,9';Y§£[77i”-3 yuams myw”;wzrlmngrmimumwlMg:W . This is to certify that the thesis entitled Changes in MMPI frofiles in First Prison Offenders During Their First Year of Imprisonment presented by Edward H. Steininger has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. dqpeein Guidance & Counseling W 61/157) ZMWN/ Major profesgr Date July 26, 1951 0—169 LIBR A R y Michigan State University CHANGES IN THE mm PROFILES OF FIRST PRISON OFFENDERS DURING THEIR FIRST YEAR OF DEPRISONMENT BY Edward Henry Steininger AN ABSTRACT Submitted to the School of Advanced Graduate Studies of Muchigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administrative and Educational Services Year ’ 1957 ,’1 , 7 Approved (4;/}<2£7§fi§l li§{_c%%%§vé£fi/Lék7bi~ai 1 EDWARD HENRY STEININGER ABSTRACT The Problem: The purposes of this study were to inves- tigate what changes in MMPI Profiles took place in first prison offenders during their first year of imprisonment, and when during this year these changes occurred. Methodology and Procedure: The study sample was com- posed of 185 first prison offenders admitted to the State Prison of Southern Michigan between February 1, 1956 and January 31, 1957. Within the first week after their ad- mission to the institution, the men were administered the group form of the MMPI. During February, 1957, this test was readministered. The sample was then divided into 12 staggered monthly groups, so that each group in the sample represented a different length of incarceration at the time of retesting. The number of men in the groups varied be- tween 10 and 22. The Major Findings 1. Initial test findings: Analysis of variance of the scores for the 12 groups for each of the 13 MMPI scales indicated that the groups were comparable initially. 2. Retest findings: a. Analysis of variance of the scores for 2 EDWARD HENRY STEININGER ABSTRACT the 12 groups for each of the 13 MMPI scales revealed that the Mf and Si scores varied significantly among the groups. b. Comparison of the initial and the retest means revealed significant decreases on the D, F, Mf, Pa, Pt, Ma, and Si scales, and significant increases on the L and K scales. I c. Analysis of variance for the change scores (retest minus initial scores) indicated significant varia- tions among the 12 groups on the K and D scales. 3. Test-retest reliability: a. Test-retest correlations for the 12 groups for each of the 13 scales were calculated. Ninety-three of the 156 correlations were significant. b. The test~retest correlations for the total sample for the 13 scales were all significant. A. Inter-scale correlations: a. Correlations were calculated for both the initial test and the retest between each scale and every other one. Fifty-six of the 78 correlations were signifi- cant on the initial test, St on the retest. b. Generally, the same pattern of inter- correlations existed on both testings. 5. The anxiety index: welsh's anxiety index was calculated for each EDWARD HENRI STEININGER ABSTRACT man. Both the initial and the retest means were signifi- cantly different from."normal," and the initial mean was significantly higher than the retest mean. 6. The internalization ratio: welsh's internalization ratio was calculated for each man. The initial mean was not significantly dif- ferent from "normal"; the retest mean was significantly lower. The decrease between testings was significant, and varied in size among the 12 groups. 7. Abnormal and normal profiles: JMeehl's "normal" and "abnormal" categories 'were applied to both initial and retest profiles. Initial- ly, 62% of the men had abnormal profiles; on the retest 71% did. The increase was significant. Conclusions and Implications 1. Significant changes in personality adjustment as determined by the MMPI profiles were elicited during the first offender's first year in prison. Relating these changes to months imprisoned suggests that after a period of depression and anxiety, the prisoners became less de- pressed and less anxious during the middle of the year, but returned to their initial adjustment at the end of the year. This knowledge could be of value to the institution A EDWARD HENRY STEININGER ABSTRACT counselor. 2. The present study only covered one year of imprisonment; this leaves unanswered many questions about the future adjustment of these men, and it would be in- structive to trace the trends observed thus far. 3. Longitudinal research starting before impris- onment and continuing after release would appear fruitful, since it would permit greater focus on the individual case, and also cover a greater time span. A. Because of its demonstrated significance, the time variable should be incorporated into future re- search. 5. Research designed to develop methods to pre- dict prison adjustment would be invaluable and seems feasible. With such knowledge, institution personnel could tailor the rehabilitation program for individual inmates. CHANGES IN THE MMPI PROFILES OF FIRST PRISON OFFENDERS DURING THEIR FIRST YEAR OF nJIPRISONMENT By Edward Henry Steininger A THESIS Submitted to the School of Advanced Graduate Studies of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administrative and Educational Services 1957 0\ 4}»67 Edward Henry Steininger candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Final Examination, July 26,1957,1:OO pem., Dissertation: Roam 20, Mbrrill Hall Changes in the MMPI Profiles of First Prison Offenders During Their First Year of Imprisonment Outline of Studies major Subject: Counseling and Guidance Minor Subjects: Educational Psychology, Higher Education Biographical Items Born, April 23, 1925, New Yerk City, New York undergraduate Studies, Brooklyn College, 1946-19A9 Graduate Studies, New York University, 1949-1952; Experience: Member of: thhigan State University, 1954-1957 Employment Interviewer, New York State Em- ployment Service, 1951-1952; Psychologist Intern, New York State Psychological Intern Training Program, 1952-1953; Clinical. Psy- chologist, Willard State Hospital, 1953- 195h; Clinical Psychologist, Psychiatric Clinic Michigan Department of Corrections, 195A-1956; Chief Psychologist, Psychiatric Clinic,.Michigan Department of Corrections, 1956 to present American Psychological Association, Michigan Psychological Association, American Associ- ation of Correctional Psychologists, American Personnel and Guidance Association, National Vbcational Guidance Association -__.._._.____— rs /‘| [W ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to thank Dr. Walter F. Johnson Jr., who, as his major Professor and Guidance Committee Chair- man, provided constant, invaluable counsel and encourage- ment in all phases of this project. He also wishes to ex- press his appreciation to the other members of his Guid- ance Committee, Dr. Harry W. Sundwall, Dr. William W. Far- quhar, Dr. Gregory A. Miller, and Dr. Buford Stefflre, for giving of their time, criticisms, and suggestions. Grateful acknowledgements are due to Er. Gus Harrison, Director of the Department of Corrections for the State of Michigan, and Mr. William H. Bannan, Warden of the State Prison of Southern Michigan, for permitting the conduct of this study, as well as for granting financial aid. Dr. Warren S. Willa, the author's immediate supervi- sor, is to be thanked for his generous support. The psy- chologists of the Reception Diagnostic Center have been extremely helpful in the collection of the data, and their aid is much appreciated. The author is extremely grateful to all of the prison inmates who participated in this amdy, and he is especially grateful to Bob and Doug, for their patient and competent clerical aid. Finally, to his wife, Merion Steininger, the author ex- presses utmost appreciation for her assistance in tab- ulating, and for her inspiration and vital moral support, without which this project would have been impossible. CHAPTER I. II. III. IV. TABLE OF CONTENTS THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . Justification for the Study . . . . . . Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . Organization of the Study . . . . . . . REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . . IntrOduCtion O O O O O O O O 0 O O I 0 Observations on Changes in Personality as a Result of Imprisonment . . . . . . Studies on Psychological Changes during Imprisonment . . . . . . . . . . . . . Concluding Statement . . . . . . . . . METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES . . . . . . . Site of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . Experimental Design of the Study . . . thhod of Sampling . . . . . . . . . . Testing Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . Composition and Characteristics of the Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . ANALYSIS OF THE DATA . . . . . . . . . . Initial Test Findings . . . . . . . . . Comparison of Study Sample with a Random Sample of Prison Inmates . . . . Page \J ~q ox ;- x» A) +4 13 17 18 18 30 3 5 1+0 42 5O 50 53 CHAPTER Retest Findings . . . . . . . . . . Comparability of the Twelve Groups ‘with Respect to MMPI Data . . . . . . Changes in MMPI Scores . . . . . . . The Statistical Significance of Mean Changes in the Mbnthly Groups . . . . Test - Retest Reliability . . . . . . Inter - Scale Correlations Changes in Inter - Scale Correlations The Anxiety Index . . . . . . . . . . The Internalization Ratio . Abnormal and Normal Profiles Supplementary Data . . . . v. DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS . . VI. Initial Test Findings . . . . . Comparison of Study Sample and Random Prison Sample . . . . . Test --Retest Reliability . . . Changes in the MMPI Scores Observed Changes on MMPI as a Function of Length of Incarceration Summary of the Discussion . . . . SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . The Problem . . . . . . . . Methodology and Procedure . The Findings . . . . . . . 5h 58 76 87 90 95 98 99 102 10A 110 113 113 11h 116 117 119 121 125 125 125 126 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Implications for Further Research . . . . , BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX.....................'. 1. Appendix A. MMPI Raw Scores for the Total Sample of 185 First Prison Offenders on the Initial Test and the Retest O C O O 0 O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O 0 Appendix B. Critical Ratio Comparison of Each Monthly Group for Those Analyses of Variance Which Yielded Significant F's: Retest MI Scores; Retest Si Scores, K Change Scores, D Change Scores, Internalization Ratio Change Scores . . ... . . . . . . . . . vi 129 131 133 13 5 135 149 TABLE I. II. III. X. LIST OF TABLES Race Distribution in the Twelve Staggered Groups Selected in Terms of Time of Initial Incarceration...................... I.Q. Distribution in the Twelve Staggered Groups Selected in Terms of Time of hitial IncarcerationOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Reading Level Distribution in the Twelve Staggered Groups Selected in Terms of Time of Initial Incarceration.............. Mban Ages and Analysis of variance for the Twelve Staggered Groups................ mean Minimum.Prison Sentences and Analysis of variance for the Twelve Staggered GrouPSOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo mean maximum.Prison Sentences and Analysis of variance for the Twelve Staggered GrouPSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Comparison Between Initial MMPI Scores of the Total Sample and.Mean Initial MMPI Scores of a Random Prison Sample........... ZMean Retest Scores and Standard Deviations on the MMPI Scales for the Total Sample of First Prison Offenders..................... Imean Differences Between Initial and Retest Scores on the MMPI Scales for the Total Sample of First Prison Offenders........... Imeans, Standard Deviations, and Analysis of variance for Each of the MMPI Scales on the Initial Test for the Twelve Selected GrouPSCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO......OOOOOOOIOOOOOO A-Q TheItscaleoooooooooooooooooooooooooooo BO TheEseal-60000000000000.000000.0.0000. 0 TheKseal-6000000000.000000000000000... D. The H8 scaleooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Page #3 45 #7 #8 51 55 56 TABLE I. III. XIII. E; The D scaleoooooooo00000000000000.0000. F0 The H? scaleoooooo00.000000000000000... G0 The Pd ScaleOOooooooeoooooooooooooooooo H0 Thesz scaleooooooooooo000.000.000.000. I. The Pa scaleooooooo00000000000000.0000. J. The Pt scaleooooooooooococoon...coco... K. The SC scaleooooo00000000000000.0000... L. TheIMa scaleooooooo00000000000000.0000. M; The Si $0316..........................o Means, Standard Deviations, and Analysis of Variance for Each of the MMPI Scales ‘ on the Retest for the Twelve Selected GrouPSOOOOOOOOO......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.... A. The L scaleooooooooooo0.000000000000000 B. The F scaleoooooooooooeoooooooooooooooo C. The K Scale............................ DO The H8 scaleoooooooooooooooooo000000000 E. The D scaleoooooooooooooooooo0000000000 F. The Hy Scale.................... ...... . G. The Pd scaleooooooooooooooooooooooooooo H0 The:Mf scaleooooooooooo0000000000000... I. The Pa Scale........................... J. The Pt Scale........................... K. The SC scaleoooooooooooooooooococoa-coo L0 The M3 scaleooooooooooooooooo0000000000 M; The Si scaleoooooooooooooooooooooooooo. Mean Changes in MMPI Scores Between the Initial Test and the Retest for the Twelve Staggered Groups........................... Standard Deviations and Analyses of variance of the MMPI Change Scores Between the Initial Test and the Retest for the Twelve Staggered Groups.................... A. The L scaleoooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Be The FoscaleOOOOOO00000000000000.0000... c. The K scaleooooooooooooooooooo.oooooooo D. The H8 scaleOooooo0.0000000000000000... Ea The D scaleooooooo0.0000000000000000... F. The Hy Scale........................... Go The Pd scaleooooooooooooeoooeoooooooooo HO Th6:Mf scaleoooooooooooooooococoooooooo viii Page TABLE IIVIQA. XXI-Be 1., The Pa seal-8000000000coco-000000000000. J0 ThePtscale...ooooooooooooooooooooooo. K. The SC seal-6.0000000000000000oooooooooo LO TheMaseal-6000000000000000000.00000000 MO The Si scaleooooooooooooooooooooooocoo. Test-Retest Correlations on the.MMPI Scales for the Twelve Staggered Mbnthly GrouPSOOOOOO0.0.0.0000.........OOOOOOOOOOOO Difference Among the Test-Retest Correlations of the Twelve Staggered GrouPSOCOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.0..........OOOOOOOOO Inter-Scale Correlations on'the Initial Test for the Total Sample.................. Inter-Scale Correlation on the Retest for the Total sample.........OOOOOOOOOOOOO. Anxiety Index Data: Initial Test Means, Retest Means, Mean Changes, Test-Retest Correlations and Analyses of variance for the Initial Test, the Retest and the changeSOOOOOOO00O00.00000IOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOO. Internalization Ratio Data: Initial Test Means, Retest Means, Mean Changes, Test- Retest Correlations, and Analyses of variance for the initial Test, the Retest, and the Changes............................ Number and Per Cent of Abnormal MMPI Profiles on the Initial Test and on the Retest for the Twelve Staggered Groups..... Distribution of Normal and Abnormal MMPI Profiles on the Initial Test and on the. ReteStOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOO......OOOOOOOOOOQOOIO Correlation Between Age and Initial MMPI Depression Score, Retest Depression Score, and Depression Score Change................ Page 82 8h 91 9h 96 97 100 103 106 106 110 /V FIGURE 1. 2. 3. 5. 6. 7. LIST OF FIGURES. The Mean Initial MMPI Profile for the T0138]. sapleoooooooooooooooooooo00000.0 Comparison of the Mean Initial Test MMPI Profile with the Mean Retest Profile for the TOtal samplGOOOOOOOOO00.000.00.000. Mean Mf Scores on Retest Among the welve GrouP8000000000000000000I...00.0000. Mean Si Scores on Retest Among the melve GroupSOOOOOO....OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Mean Changes in K Scores for the Twelve Staggered Monthly Groups................... Mean Changes in D: Scores for the Twelve Staggered Monthly GroupSooo....... 0000000 0. Percentage of Abnormal MMPI Profiles on the Initial Test and on the Retest for the Twalve Staggered Monthly Groups. . . . . . . . Page 52 57 71+ 75 85 87 108 CHAPTER I THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM Introduction Practically every day, men and women are being sen- tenced to prison. Shortly after being sentenced, they are whisked away to penal institutions to commence serving their sentences. The transition from.the life of a free citizen to that of a prisoner involves not merely an en- vironmental change, but also a period of adjustment to a .radically different mode of living. Many years ago, prisons were considered places of punishment; discipline was harsh, living conditions ‘were unwholesome, privileges were few, and idle time was con- siderable. .Mbdern penological theory no longer thinks strictly in terms of punishment, but rather, in terms of rehabilitation of prison inmates. Rehabilitation pro- grams have been established in penal institutions through- out the country. The purpose of these programs is to promote the reformation of the criminal so that when he again becomes a free citizen, he will continue in this reformed role for the rest of his life. One of the main reasons for this change in the penal- ogical viewpoint is the observation that people incarcerated in prisons did not appear to "profit" from their prisen experience and frequently incurred several additional pris- on terms. Currently, in the State of Michigan, the total recidivist rate is approximately 45 to 50 per cent. Approxe imately 95 per cent of the men incarcerated will be re- leased from imprisonment, but almost 50 per cent of these will be returned to some prison. This suggests that while the rehabilitation programs may be more humane than "punishment," they are far from completely effective. 0. Penologists generally agree that incarceration usually has a detrimental effect on the personality adjustment of prisoners (2, 15). It would be important to ascertain.em~ pirically what changes, if any, do occur to prison inmates. Knowledge about personality changes which might be attribu- ted, in part, to the environmental influence of the prison would be of considerable aid in the development of reha- bilitation programs that could, conceivably, reduce the recidivistic rate. Statement of the Problem The purpose of this study is to investigate the nature of psychological changes occurring in the first prison. offender during his first year in the State Prison of South- ern Michigan. The type and extent of change, if any, is to be measured by the Minnesota.Mhltiphasic Personality Inven- tory. The study is designed to measure the psychological effect of the first year of imprisonment. All newly received inmates at the State Prison of Southern Michigan were administered the Minnesota Multi- phasic Personality Inventory (MMPI). This testing proced- ure was continued for one full year and, at the end of that, time, all the men who had been selected for this study were re-administered the same inventory. In this fashion, at the end of one year, data were collected for a staggered group of men whose incarceration varied from one to twelve months. It is thus possible to note what changes take place in the sample population as a function of length of incarceration from a minimum.of one month to a maximum.of one year. Justification for the Study A.review of the literature indicates that there have been very few studies conducted which clearly define what changes in personality take place during a period of incar- ceration, let alone demonstrate their actual occurrence. 4MOSt of the literature on this topic is based on observa- tions made by workers in the field of penology or related fields, such as psychology, sociology, and education. This study is a systematic attempt at making use of a reportedly reliable and valid psychological test to note what changes, if any, of a psychological nature occur during imprisonment. A review of the literature suggests that this is the first I“ systematic endeavor in this area. ' This study, then, is of theoretical and practical value. In penological literature, there is general agree- ment that confinement in prison engenders considerable change in the personality of the individual offender. It is generally felt that many of the changes that do develop are undesirable. This suggests that if a prisoner is to be aided in making a satisfactory adjustment to institu- tional life as well as a satisfactory adjustment as a free citizen, it is important that we understand the salient features of the psychological reorganization occasioned by the imposed way of life that is found in a prison set- ting. With an understanding of what changes in personal- ity take place during a man's period of confinement, one can determine, through theoretical inference, which type of change is apt to be of the most benefit to the man; it may also be possible to deduce what factors in the prison environment encourage detrimental changes and, ac- cordingly, modify the prison environment in such a fashion as to diminish the influence of these factors. Definition of Terms Every field of specialization has some unique terms which require definition in order to avoid misunderstand- ing. The field of penology is no exception, and there- fore those terms Which may be unfamiliar are defined. The definitions used in connection with this study stem from reference texts (2, 15) and prison personnel. First Prison Offender - An inmate who is experienc- ing his first period of incarceration within a prison. JMaximym.Custody - Generally a walled institution.with the inmates occupying cells at all times. Armed guards are posted on the walls. Medium.Custody - Generally an institution with no walls but perhaps a fence. Inmates are confined in cells at night and are under constant supervision on work assign- ments during the day. Minimum.Custody - Generally an open institution, like a camp, with no fences, walls, or armed guards. Little direct supervision is maintained on work assignments. Parole - The serving of a sentence in the outside community, usually after a portion of the sentence has been served in prison. Probation - A court action whereby an offender is ,placed under ‘supervision in the community without ever entering a prison. The offender need not enter prison as long as he observes the conditions laid down.by the court. Probation is frequently used for first offenders and juveniles. 7 6 Maximum Term - The maximum term to which a person can be sentenced for a particular crime. Minimum Term - The minimum number of years a prisoner must be confined before he can be considered for release on parole. All prison inmates except those sentenced for life are assigned a minimum term. In Michigan, judges have some leeway in determining minimum terms. Trusty - A prisoner who is permitted to serve his prison sentence in a setting relatively free of guards who are armed and prison walls. Organization of the Study Chapter II contains a review of the literature per- tinent to the study, with further justification for the study. The methodology and procedure used in the conduct of the study are discussed in Chapter III, with an expla- nation of the method of sampling, a description of the psychological test used, and pertinent information re- garding the sample population. The results of the study, as arrived at through various statistical analyses, are presented in Chapter IV. Discussion of the findings, com- parison of present findings with other pertinent research in the field, critique of the study, and implications for further research are presented in Chapter V. The Summary and Conclusions are presented in Chapter VI. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction This chapter contains a review of only that literature in the field of penology which is directly related to this study. The chapter is divided into three sections. The first section contains a review of general observations made by people prominent in the field of penology about the influences of imprisonment. The second section deals with research projects set up to evaluate what changes, if any, take place in the personality adjustment of individuals as a result of incarceration. The third section is a conclud- ing statement. Observations on Changes in Personality as a result of Imprisonment There is available a considerable amount of literature criticizing our penal system. These criticisms;range from the actual physical facilities of the prison itself to the rehabilitation programs which are currently being used. Even in the early 1930's, Patterson (1h) deplored our penal system. He pointed out that society is to be served best if during a man's period of incarceration he is helped to become a better adjusted individual and, upon his eventual release, he can take his place in the community. He emphasized that most penal institutions actually have the opposite effect, and that all too frequently, a man is more hardened and antisocial once he is released than when he was first imprisoned. He ascribed these changes that develop to the unnatural environment into which a man is placed: where physical movement is grossly restricted, where life is one monotonous routine, where all initiative and self-reliance are drained from.a man. In the late 1930's, Clemmer studied what he calls a typical American state penitentiary of about 2,300 inmates, and concluded: The prisoners' world is an atomized world. Its people are atoms acting in confusion. (5:2h) He goes on further to explain that: Prisonerization or the process of taking on in great- er or less degree of the folkways, mores, customs and general culture of the penitentiary may so dis- rupt the prisoner's personality that a happy adjust- ment in any community becomes next to impossible. (5:25) Though Clemmer's study is of a sociological nature and is concerned primarily with the social structure of a peni- tentiary, his observations relative to personality change are certainly in agreement with those of other observers in the field. Price Chenault and George Jennings (4) described in 9 considerable detail the pot pourri of inmates to be found in a typical state penitentiary. They suggest that because of the variety of different types of people cramped togeth- er in close confinement, the individuals have to make a multitude of adjustments, far more than are required by the man in the street, and as a consequence, many prisoners are likely to develop mental disturbances. Barnes and Testers (2) deplore our present penal in- stitutions, and question whether the contemporary prison is really any improvement over the whipping post, stocks, and deportation that were common over a century ago. They state that, on a theoretical level, a prison is intended to promote the reformation of its inhabitants, but that, in actual operation, prisons are grossly ineffective in this endeavor, and make an inmate more of a menace to soci- ety than he was before incarceration. They suggest that the prison regime brings into play a large number of disas- trous influences that would put a severe strain on a relatively normal person, and, since they consider most prison inmates emotionally unstable persons to begin with, they feel that prison life is apt to be quite devastating. Among the disastrous influences that they perceive are the following: curtailment of normal sociability, denial of self-assertion, rare opportunity for interesting work, inadequate play and recreation facilities, and deprivation 10 of a normal sex life with limited opportunities for the sublimation of the sex drive. The authors furthermore contend that the monotonous prison routine, intensified regimentation, intense monotony, lack of freedom, inade- quate and obsolete physical facilities, lack of sufficient contact with the outside world, the usually monotonous and inferior prison food, the multiplicity of rules, many of a repressive nature, all serve to make prison an unforget- table experience. Lack of privacy and the monotony in the prison routine tend to put the inmates on edge and on occa- sion, a.man.may develop a Serious mental disorder which may scar him for life. John Bartlomeartin (12) reiterates some of the obser- vations of Barnes and masters, and adds this additional material: Men go to prison, but they don't cease to exist there; they have to live there, and they live according to the conditions imposed upon them, they do what they have to do....Everything makes it hard...the guards, the other convicts, the walls and locks themselves. A prison psychologist has said, '...The unnatural en- vironment, the discipline, the endless confinement being cut off from all normal contacts, the shock of sudden imprisonment...when you come to prison you're a close man to psychosis. Then all the time you are here youige Ender a constant tension, constant strife' .... :h - J! ‘Walter Reckless (15) again reiterates many of the in- adequacies of our penal system, and also mentions that strong discipline and severe authoritative handling of the Jae—W I \ .- \ ( \ IX , f [1 11 prison inmates may well develp anti-social grudges toward society and authority which will undoubtedly lead to the development of hostile feelings; these may eventually be consummated in further aggressive acts, in part as revenge for the treatment received while incarcerated. He also comments about the general tendency in various penal insti- tutions to grant the inmates privileges, such as free tobacco, commissary privileges, payment of small wages for services rendered, visiting and writing privileges, radio, sports, and schooling, ‘which are not in themselves a rehabilitation program, as some prison administrators seem to think. Reckless suggests that these things are good, but are simply pressure-reducing devices, and that actually, a program. is needed to reconstruct the habits, points of view, and attitudes of the inmates if rehabilitation is to take place. Several observational studies have been conducted on prisoners of war. They are not strictly applicable to the present problem, since the individuals studied were prison- ers of war and the prisons in which they were confined were chiefly a means of detention, rather than of rehabilitation. Nonetheless, these studies will be described very briefly. Jacobson (11) describes the psychiatric effects of imprisonment on female political prisoners in Nazi Germany. 12 She was herself a prisoner during the two-year period in which she made her observations, and accordingly, ‘was quite restricted in regard to the extent of her work. She noted an increase in anxiety, a repression of libidinal urges, a regression to pleasanter periods of the individu- al's life, and an increased interest in literature and other forms of creative work. Cazeneuve (3), who also was a prisoner of war during world‘war II, reports his observations of the effects of captivity. He indicates that at first, prisoners are quite dejected and have feelings of depersonalization, but that eventually, new habits and interests geared to prison camp life are evolved that fit in to make a more comfortable adjustment to prison life. He also observed that the men spent considerable time doting on memories, generally of a pleasant nature and also, contemplating their future lives upon release from.the prison camps. Arntzen (l), a German psychologist who was a prisoner of war interned in a Canadian prison camp, observed the reactions of the ten to twelve thousand men in this camp over a two-year period of time. They were between 18 and 60 years old, and most of them had been imprisoned four to five years. He concludes that no abnormal mental reac- tions took place which might be attributed to the type of f1 13 confinement afforded by this prison camp. He noted that the inmates tended to pick up. rumors quite easily and believe them, and also, that frequently, when there was a break in the routine, for example if mail delivery was late or tobacco was limited or curtailed, the men tended to act more depressed and were also more irritable. Studies on Psychological Changes During Imprisonment The preceding section covered some of the literature concerning observations of the possible effects of incar- ceration on personality. The present section reviews the few existing studies in this area. In 1952, Ian Gordon Gill (8) conducted a study on the psychological effects of incarceration on ten inmates of the North Carolina prison system over a three-month period of time. These ten men were tested immediately upon com- mitment to prison with a test battery composed of the following: the Wechsler-Bellevue Intelligence Scale, the Rorschach Test, the Thematic Apperception Test, and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. Three months following commitment, the men were retested with the same battery of tests. Gill's sample of subjects consisted of nine white inmates and one Negro, who ranged in age from 16 years and 1 month to 19 years and 10 months at the time of commitment. Range in educational level was from fifth 11+ grade to high school graduation. The types of crimes committed by the subjects ranged from "Breaking and Enter- ing"’to ”Assault with a Deadly‘Weapon.with Intent to Kill." Sentences to be served by the subjects ranged from 1 to 13 years. Eight of the subjects had records of prior arrest, and had either served short sentences in road camps or in training schools for delinquents, or had been placed on pro- bation. Interestingly enough, Gill reports that of all the tests he used, particularly the personality tests, the MMPI was apparently the most sensitive to the elicitation of changes in psychological adjustment. By and large, the changes on the Rorschach and the Thematic Apperception tests were negligible. The conclusions he draws from his studies are, as fol- lows: l) IMeasurable psychological changes occur during the first three months of imprisonment, which appears to affect the intellectual and over-all functioning of the first of- fender. 2) Depression appears immediately following commit- ment, accompanied by constriction and reduced intellectual efficiency; these effects of imprisonment would tend to E 15 make psychological testing for classification purposes unreliable. 3) The depression gradually diminishes during the en- suing months and is supplanted by feelings of dissatisfaction, boredom, and self-pity, which feelings are likely to height- en tendencies toward an unwholesome mode of thinking. AJ "The prison environment appears to foster, in the first offender, tendencies toward sluggishness and apathy, rationalization and self-pity, atypical and anti-social thinking, and an increased indulgence in fantasy as a sub- stitute for active pursuits." (8:53) 5) "Personality disturbances present on commitment are prone to exaggeration under the stress conditions of prison life." (8:53) Harrison Cough and Grant Mann (9) conducted a study (unpublished) at a military rehabilitation center where military offenders are under treatment. Thirty-four mili- tary offenders ‘were administered the MMPI upon their reception at this installation, and three months later, at the completion of the treatment program, the test was read- ministered. Because of the small size of the sample, the unsystematic nature of sample selection, and the lack of a control group, the authors do not consider the present 16 study an evaluation of the therapeutical effectiveness;of the rehabilitation program, but present the data primarily because of its possible interest for psychologists working in similar installations. The initial group profile is described as being gener- ally of the psychopathic type (elevated Pd and.Ma Scales) with a somewhat greater elevation on the neurotic scales than is normal. Retesting revealed a considerable drop in over-all elevation of all the scales, but a persistence of pattern. They found statistically significant changes on five of the clinical scales; the largest drop was on the depression scale, and averaged 10.09 T—scale units. They also applied Welsh's anxiety index and internali- zation ration, and found a non-significant drop in the former and a significant drop in the latter, which finding is interpreted by them as an increased tendency toward acting-out behavior of an impulsive and uncontrolled na- ture e The authors interpret the study as follows: The general conclusions which appear to be justified by the present data are first, that the MMPI diagnos- tic conventions for the behavior disorder profile are substantiated and second, that the rehabilitation program is re ated to MMPI profile changes suggestive of loss of tension and anxiety, improved sense of ‘wellebeing, and a greater tendency to externalize and act out emotional stress. (9:A) 17 Concluding Statement The general conclusion to be drawn from. a. review of the literature is that there is agreement that imprison- ment is not yielding the anticipated results, but all too frequently, the opposite effects. This conclusion, hows ever, is based on very little scientific evidence. Clemmer has aptly summarized this situation in the following state- ment: No scientific evidence exists to show in what precise manner or to what degree the influences of the prison culture mold the lives of those subjected to its cul- tureo (6:319) This statement would appear to be almost as appropri- ate today as it was seven years ago. CHAPTER III IMETHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES Site of the Study Because this study is concerned with changes that take place in men during a period of incarceration; in a penal institution, description of the prison environment and some of the activities the men might engage in appears essential. It is hoped that from this description the reader can develop a "feel" for the prison environment. This study was conducted at the State Prison of South- ern Michigan, located at Jackson. It is the largest prison within the Midhigan Department of Corrections, and contains within its walls almost one-half of the prison population of the state. The average number of men confined inside the walls is h,300; an additional 1,650 men are maintained in the Trusty Division of the prison under medium custody conditions. The remainder of the state's penal population. is maintained at the following penal institutions: the Marquette Prison Branch, the Michigan Reformatory, the Youth Division, which maintains two camps, and the Camp Program proper, which accommodates nearly 1,000 men in var- ious camps scattered throughout the state. At the State Prison of Southern JMichigan, there are l" 19 four major divisions controlling the inmate population. The largest number of‘ men is confined within the walls of the institution proper under maximum.custody supervision. The Trusty Division controls all men who live outside the walls of the. institution, either in regular cell blodks or in barracks on the various prison farms close to the institu- tion. The third division of the prison is the Michigan Parole Camp, where men about to be released on parole are housed in dormatories under minimum custody conditions. The fourth and final division of the prison is the Reception- Diagnostic Center whidh became operative in February of 1956.' All men who are sentenced to prison are received at the Reception-Diagnostic Center for processing, except those sentenced in the Upper Peninsula of the state, who are received at the marquette Prison Branch. The Reception-Diagnostic Center is housed in a former cell block of the prison proper. Although the cell block is physically related to other cell blocks of the prison, alterations in construction have sealed the building off from the rest of the institution. The regular prison cell blocks contain five tiers of cells facing each other, though separated by a wide expanse of open space. A rail- ing serves as a guard on each tier. The various galleries are accessible by staircases located at each end of the cell blocks. The Reception-Diagnostic Center block has, in 20 addition.to the iron railings, a heavy, one-inch, wire mesh from.floor to ceiling which completely encloses each tier. This wire guard was put in place primarily to prevent any man from.oommitting suicide by jumping off any of the gal- leries. The Reception-Diagnostic Center cell block is also different from.other cell blocks by having small offices and several large rooms, which are used by the professional staff of the Reception-Diagnostic Center during their pro- cessing of the newly arrived inmates. This cell block also differs from other cell blocks in that part of the floor space at one end of the building is used as a dining room. All men in the Reception-Diagnostic Center eat, sleep, and carry on all other activities within this single cell block. Each new prisoner, as he enters the Center, is ”dressed in.” His personal clothing and other personal belongings which he had when he first entered prison are replaced with prison-issue items and clothing. He takes a shower, is given a hair out if this is indicated, is finger printed and photographed, is assigned a five-digit number which for all practical purposes replaces his name during his confine- ment and, finally, is assigned to a cell. All men incarcer- ated at this institution are assigned individual cells. Each cell measures 10 by 6 feet, with a 75-foot ceiling. Each cell contains a washbasin, a toilet stool, an iron cot and bedding, an iron locker in which he may store some 21 personal effects, and a set of earphones through which he may listen to one of the radio stations. Processing at the Reception-Diagnostic Center takes about thirty days. The first week of processing is rather hectic for a newly arrived prisoner. During this time, he undergoes a physical examination, receives various inocula- tions, and is rendered whatever medical services are indi- cated. The man also undergoes a battery of psychological tests, generally administered in group form. The men are also seen individually by counselors, who obtain a complete social history and gather together all the pertinent data about the man into one main record folder, Which will fol- low him through his institutional life. If it seems indi- cated, a man may be referred to the Center psychiatrist for evaluation. and/or treatment. During this time, the men are also required to attend a series of orientation lectures given by various institutional personnel, who des- cribe the activities of the institution, and what facili- ties are available; the inmates are also given an indica- tion of what is expected from them. The remaining three to four weeks a man spends in the Reception-Diagnostic Center are relatively idle. Most of his time is spent alone in his cell reading books and maga- zines which are made available, or perhaps listening to the radio through earphones. A few men are kept busy doing 22 house-cleaning chores about the cell block. In good weather, the men are permitted to exercise in an outdoor yard for a few hours a day. In general, a man's first experience with prison life after the initial proceSsing is not stimulating and, basically, involves a very sterile existence with lit- tle to do except think about the past and worry about the future. Occasionally, disciplinary measures are taken when a man does not abide by the prison rules as outlined in a handbook he receives during his first day at the institu- tion. The Reception-Diagnostic Center maintains its own disciplinary board before which an inmate appears fer an infraction of the rules. A sentence is meted out, usually a loss of privileges; for example, a man may lose his ear- phones for a specified period of time, if he has been found guilty of an infraction of the rules. Since only men who were transferred from the Reception- Diagnostic Center to the State Prison of Southern Michigan were considered in this study, only this institution will be described. The State Prison of Southern lMichigan was chosen as the site of this study primarily because the writer has been employed at the institution for the past three years and is quite familiar with it, in terms of the inmate 23 population as well as the prison program. At this institu- tion, there is also a rather heterogenous group of men serving sentences for a wide variety of offenses. The State Prison of Southern Michigan is big. Ten cell blocks, each approximately 350 feet long and 5 stories high, form the front wall of the prison and part of the two side walls. A.3A-foot-high, steel-reinforced, concrete wall comp plates the enclosure of the prison yard, which approximates an area of 57 acres. The institution has been described as a self-contained city (12) and indeed it is. Within the walls, there is a power plant which provides all the electricity, hot water, and steam used within the institution. A tour of the insti- tution would disclose the presence of various types of fac- tories, notably a metal stamping plant where license plates for the State of lMichigan are produced, as well as other sheet metal products, sudh as metal lockers and cabinets. In addition to the stamp plant, there is a cannery where various fruits and vegetables, Which are grown on prison farms, are processed and canned and, later, used at the institution. A.shoe factory manufactures all the shoes worn by the inmates at all of the penal institutions in the state. A textile plant is in operation the year around. There the raw fiber is woven into material which, in turn, is later sent to the tailor shop and made into blue denim 1 ’3 '5 1 \ l \ I \ - r \ u v ’ \ p. . . I. /‘l 2h trousers and Jackets, and other items of clothing, worn by the prison inmates. In addition to the various prison in- dustries, one also finds the institution laundry, general maintenance shops, and the main institution kitchen where all the food is prepared. Within the walls, there is also a fully equipped hos- pital with a staff of four full-time physicians and two dentists who care for the physical needs of the men incar- cerated at this prison. Representatives frmm the three major religious groups are also in attendance at the insti- tution; they hold regular religious services, and frequent- ly see many of the inmates in private consultations. Any time an inmate requests to see a member of the clergy, he ' is permitted to do so. In addition to the aforementioned industries, which offer employment to some of the inmates, there are other facilities which offer recreational oppor- tunities. A gymnasium offers opportunities for physical recreation, and in good weather, intramural activities are maintained in the recreation yard, where softball, football, and other outdoor sports activities can be carried on. lMo- tion pictures are shown to the general prison population on the weekends and, on occasion, a stage production by inmate showman, or perhaps by outside talent, is featured. A.music department is maintained, which gives some of the men.an Opportunity to learn to play musical instruments and gives 25 those who already have obtained some proficiency in this area an opportunity to continue to practice and develop their skills. There are also educational opportunities at the insti- tution to acquire various vocational skills at the vocation- al school, and academic education in the academic school. The academic school maintains a curriculum starting with the first grade and going through a complete course of study at the high school level. Also available are courses in comp mercial high school subjects, such as bookkeeping, account- ing, and business machine operation. In addition to these general courses offered in the academic school, there is also a series of cell study courses, wherein a man does not attend classes regularly, but rather, studies in his cell and progresses in his studies at his own pace; he sees in- structors in the academic school at regular intervals who note his progress and help him with any difficult problems he has encountered. Arrangements have also been made for men to take correspondence school courses, under the sup- ervision of the academic school instructors. The vocational school offers courses of study designed to equip a man with the necessary vocational skills which will enable him to secure employment at a skilled or semi- skilled level in such areas as arc welding, acetylene weld- ing, carpentry, engineering drawing, machine shop, masonry, 26 sign painting, and typewriter repair. For the man in the institution who, for one reason or another, is not employed in one of the various prison indus- tries or does not aid in the maintenance of the institution proper, there are hobbycrafts. A.hobbycraft shop is mains tained at the institution, where a man can make use of various types of power tools, and is given the necessary instructions for the successful completion of a particular hobbycraft project. If his product is reasonably well made, and he wishes to sell it to the general public, it is put on display at the hobbycraft store located outside of the walls of the institution, where visitors to the institution have an opportunity to inspect the various hobbycraft pro- ducts and purchase any they would like. Fbr>the inmate who may be a chronic alcoholic and who may have committed his crime while under the influence of alcohol, a local Alcoholics Anonymous unit is maintained within the walls of the institution. Any inmate who wishes to enter this group may do so, and is permitted to attend the regular meetings of the group, which frequently feature outside community members of Alcoholics Anonymous. As is common practice in many other penal institutions, the inmates are permitted to publish a weekly newspaper which contains institution news, editorials, book reviews, sports reviews, and general chit-chat. 1‘1 ,1 27 Thus far, various facilities of the institution have been described, primarily to give the reader a feel for the institution as a whole, and also to permit him to visualize in.what manner an inmate may spend his time. It would ap- pear that an inmate could run from one activity to another at his own leisure; however, this is not the case, and in no large institution, particularly a penal institution, is this permitted. There must be some core of organization, and at this institution this organization stems from two major sources, primarily from.the custodial department and secondly from.the department of individual treatment. The custodial department's primary responsibility is maintain- ing custody and control over the inmate body; it is charged with seeing that a man remains in custody and does not have an opportunity to re-enter the free_community at his own leisure. Custodial officers are in charge of the various cell blocks, maintain discipline in the blocks, and see that the various activities carried on in the institution are carried on in an orderly fashion. The custodial depart- ment is very much interested in maintaining a routine for the inmates. Through this means, a constant check is kept on the activities of all the men, and it makes the general operation of the prison considerably easier. When inmates deviate from.the routine or violate institutional rules, a disciplinary board hears the cases and determines what pun- ishment if any is indicated. Punishment may take the form f4 28 of loss of privileges for a specified length of time or de- tention in solitary confinement for anywhere from one to thirty days. The department of individual treatment was created pri- marily to develop a rehabilitation program for each man incarcerated. The total inmate population is split up among ten institution counselors, and it is their responsibility to help the men assigned to them in whatever way possible. This may involve seeing that a man spends his time in pris- on profitably, perhaps in one of the industries or in one of the schools. The counselors also offer both group and individual counseling for a select number of men who appear most amenable to this type of treatment. Each inmate, as he is received at this institution, is met by his counselor, who, on.the basis of the information available to him; from the man's record-folder and his personal contacts with the inmate, recommends that the man appear before the classifi- cation committee. The counselor and the inmate work out a program which is deemed most practical for the inmate and the institution. The inmate next appears before the class- ification committee, which consists of his counselor, the director of classification, a representative from the custodial department, and perhaps some representatives from the various prison industries and other interested parties. The classification committee arrives at a decision with /' (1 29 reference to a particular inmate. The inmate is told what the program is, and, depending on the type of program, may within.a matter of a few weeks or sometimes a few months find himself actively engaged in the program which has been set up for him. Any problems the inmate may encounter dur- ing his period of incarceration are generally handled by his counselor, except disciplinary problems. If the inmate wishes to change his program, he must first discuss it with his counselor, who can make the necessary changes. IMOst men sentenced to prison in.Michigan receive a minimum and maximum.sentence for the offense. By law, he cannot be released from.prison any earlier than his minimum date; howa ever, he could be released on "parole" status earlier than his maximum sentence release date. When.a man is nearing the completion of his minimum sentence, his counselor writes a pre-parole report which, in essence, describes the in- mate's background, his program in the institution, and what progress he has made toward rehabilitating himself; the counselor also makes whatever recommendations he feels are in order with respect to parole. Generally, When an inmate has completed his minimum sentence, he is given a hearing before members of the Parole Board, who determine if he should be released under a parole officer's supervision, or whether he should continue his term of imprisonment. 30 Experimental Design of the Study The purpose of the present study is to determine what significant changes are apt to occur to a.man experiencing his first year or less of incarceration in a penal institu- tion, as measured by a psychological inventory. The study depends on the reliability and validity of the psychologi- cal instrument used; specifically, it assumes its sensitiv- ity to changes in personality which develop through exposure to a particular type of environment. Because it was felt that the number of men used in the sample population would be relatively large, it was felt necessary to apply an instru- ment that could be used in a group setting. This consider- ation immediately eliminated many instruments that might otherwise have been used. ThelMinnesota.Multiphasic Person- ality Inventory'(MMPI) was chosen on several counts. First, it was noted that the MMPI was being administered routinely to all new arrivals at the ReceptionpDiagnostic Center as part of the psychological workup. Also, the MMPI had been used in prior research in the correctional field (8, 16). Lastly, a wealth of information about the test has been ac- cumulated in the literature, much of it bearing on the cru- cial issues of reliability and validity (17). The Minnesota Mtltiphasic Personality Inventory is a psychometric instrument designed to provide scores on all the more important phases of personality. This is achieved ('v 31 by having the testee respond to a series of 566 questions with one of the following categeries: "true,” "false," and "cannot say." Since this test was administered in a group setting, thelbooklet rather than the card sorting form of the test was used. The subject records his responses on.an IBM Answer Sheet which can then be scored through the use of stencils. Through this procedure, personality character- istics may be assessed on the basis of scores a subject attains on nine clinical scales, four validity scales, and one additional scale. The current study was limited to the selection of a sample pOpulation of those men who entered the Reception- Diagnostic Center between February lst, 1956, and January 31st, 1957. February, 1956, was chosen primarily because this is the first time that the MMPI was being given rou- tinely to all newly arrived inmates at the Reception- Diagnostic Center. The total sample was divided into twelve monthly groups; each group consists of all the available men who went through the Reception-Diagnostic Center during one of the months between February lst, 1956, and January 31, 1957. Between February 26th and March lst, all the men in the experimental sample were given the MMPI a second time. Thus, the sample contained men who had been in prison one month at the time of retesting and other men who had been 32 incarcerated a period of one year at that time, as well as men ranging between these two extreme groups in terms of length of incarceration. The February, 1956 group had been in prison.more than 12 but less than 13 months at the time of retesting, the Mhrch, 1956 group more than 11 but less than 12 months, and so on, to the January, 1957 group, who had been in more than one month but less than two months. A.brief description of the MMPI scales as reported in the manual (10) is as follows: 2 -- Question Scale. A validating scale consisting simply of the total number of items put in the "cannot say" category. The size of this score affects the significance of all other scores; a large number of "cannot say" answers invalidates all others. L -- Lie score. A measure of the degree to which the subject may be attempting to falsify his scores by always choosing the response that places him in the most accept- able light socially. F -- Validity score. Not a personality scale but a check on the validity of the record. Usually indicates that the subject was careless or unable to comprehend the items. Occasionally indicates a highly individual and independent person or a person who is rather badly neurotic or psy- chotic. r- 33 K -- Correction score. Also not a personality scale. Essentially a correction factor which has been found to be of value in sharpening 'the discriminatory power of the clinical variables nOW'measured by the inventory. Hs - The Hypochondriasis Scale. Measures the amount of concern about bodily functions. It is characteristic of the hypochondriac that he is immature in his approach to adult problems, tending to fail to respond with adequate insight. D -- The Depression Scale. Measures the depth of the clinically recognized symptom, depression. A.high scare suggests a characteristic personality background, in that the person who reacts to stress with depression is charac- terized by lack of self-confidence, tendency to worry, nar- rowness of interests, and introversion. Hy - The Hysteria Scale. IMeasures the degree to which the subject is like patients who have developed conversion- type hysteria symptoms. Pd - The Psychopathic Deviate Scale. Measures the simi- larity of the subject to a group of persons whose main diffi~ culty lies in their absence of deep emotional response and their disregard of social mores. Although sometimes dan- gerous to themselves or others, these persons are commonly likable and intelligent. Except by the use of an objective instrument of this sort, their trend toward the abnormal is 31+ frequently not detected until they are in serious trouble. They may often go on behaving like perfectly normal people for several years between one outbreak and another. Their most frequent digressions from the social mores are lying, stealing, alcohol or drug addiction, and sexual immorality. They may have short periods of true psychopathic excitement or depression following the discovery of a series of their asocial or antisocial deeds. Mf - The Interest Scale. Measures the tendency toward masculinity or femininity of interest pattern. A high score indicates a deviation of the basic interest pattern in the direction of the opposite sex. Pt - The Psychasthenia Scale. Measures the tendency toward phobias or compulsive behavior. The compulsive be- havior may be either explicit, as expressed by excessive handwashing, vacillation, or other ineffectual activity, or implicit, as in the inability to escape useless thinking or obsessive ideas. The phobias include all types of un- reasonable fear of things or situations, as well as over- reaction to more reasonable stimuli. Pa - The Paranoia Scale. lMeasures the tendency toward suspiciousness, over-sensitivity, and delusions of persecu- tion, with or without expansive egotism. 35 So - The Schizophrenia Scale. measures the tendency toward bizarre and unusual thoughts or behavior. There is a splitting of the subjective life of the schizophrenic person from reality, so that the observer cannot follOW’ra- tionally the shifts in mood or behavior. Ma - The Hypomania Scale. Measures the personality factor characteristic of persons with marked overproduc- tivity in thought and action. The word "hypomania" refers to a lesser state of mania. Although the real manic patient is the lay person's prototype for the "insane,” the hypo- manic person seems justslightly off normal. The hypomanic patient has usually gotten into trouble because of under- taking too many things. He is active and enthusiastic. Contrary to common expectations, he may also be somewhat depressed at times. His activities may interfere with other people through his attempts to reform social practice, his enthusiastic stirring up of projects in which he then may lose interest, or his disregard of social conventions. In the latter connection he may get into trouble with the law; Si ~ The Social Interest Scale. Aims to measure the tendency to withdraw from social contact with others. Method of Sampling The Reception-Diagnostic Center at the State Prison of Southern Michigan formally began operating on February 1, 36 1956. One phase of the operations of the psychology section of the Reception-Diagnostic Center is the administration of the Mdnnesota.Multiphasic Personality Inventory to all in- mates entering the institution. The test is administered and scored by inmates trained and supervised by the civilian psychologists. To date, for the most part, the .MMPI has been used as a screening device to ferret out those cases which may require a more thorough psychological evaluation, and also, to briefly describe a man's current psychological adjustment. For the purposes of this study, a select group of men were readministered the MMPI some time during their first year of incarceration within the walls of the insti- tution. In this section will be described the method of selecting the men chosen for this study. In February of 1957, a review of the intake log of the ReceptionpDiagnostic Center indicated that 4,086 men were processed between February 1, 1956 and January 13, 1957. This group of h,086 consisted of a wide variety of individ- uals. Some were experiencing their first term of imprison- ment, some had previously been incarcerated in.other state or federal penal institutions, some were found to be "grad- uates" from boys' training schools where they were incarcer- ated as juveniles, and some had served sentences in military stockades. ‘Within this group of admissions, one also finds men whose only previous experience has been probation one 37 or more times and/or one or more short jail sentences. Then again, some men may never have had any contact with the police at all. For a basic research project of this nature, it did not appear feasible to investigate so heterogeneous a group of men, some of whom have experienced prolonged incarceration before and some Who have not. With this variable in mind, the sample was narrowed down to those men who have not ex- perienced confinement in prison before. 0f the total of 4,086 men, it was noted that 1,970 were described on their initial intake reports as being first prison offenders. At this phase of the investigation, it was noted that only 632 of the 1,970 men who had passed through the Reception-Diagnostic Center during this period of one year were still incarcerated within the walls of the State Prison of Southern Michigan. It was felt advis- able to eliminate as many uncontrollable variables as pos- sible from the study, and accordingly, it was decided that the group still residing at the State Prison of Southern 'Michigan would constitute the sample. By limiting the study in this fashion, it was felt that the men would be exposed to the same type of prison environment, and thus by and large have similar types of experiences during their period of incarceration. Had the sample been broadened to the total 1,970 men, there was the danger that the 38 environmental differences among various penal institutions, camps, and prison farms would have affected the results, perhaps in such a fashion that no valid conclusions could have been drawn from the data collected. Having compiled a listing of 632 inmates who were re- portedly first prison offenders and still incarcerated at the State Prison of Southern Michigan, it was next neces- sary to examine each man's record folder in detail, and ascertain his suitability for remaining part of the sample. This thorough evaluation of each man's record folder re- vealed that many men were not suitable candidates for the current study. It was discovered that, of the 632 men, 102 had actually at some previous time eXperienced a period of incarceration in a penal institution, either in another state's penal system, or perhaps in the federal penal sys- tem, .or in juvenile detention institutions, or perhaps sometimes in the armed services.* Further review of the inmates' records revealed that A1 of the 632 had been trans— ferred in from other penal installations within the state, and were accordingly disqualified for the current study *It is surprising that of the men who were thought to be first prison offenders on admission to the Reception- Diagnostic Center, one-sixth, after considerable data had been gathered in terms of probation officers' reports, military service reports and Federal Bureau of Investiga- tion arrest records, were discovered to have served previ- ous prison sentences. 39 because of experience in another type of institution with- in the state. Ten men were deemed untestable, on the baSis that they were confined in the institution hospital and were likely to remain there for a prolonged period of time. JMost of the men in the hospital were afflicted with tuber- culosis, and it was felt from a psychological standpoint that this factor would undoubtedly color their test results appreciably. Also within the group of ten untestables were several confined as patients in the psychiatric clinic in the institution because of mental aberrations, and conse- quently, they were rejected from the sample. Examinations of the records further indicated that 66 men were unable to take the initial MMPI in the Reception-Diagnostic Center primarily because of illiteracy and a few because of severe visual defects. At the time retesting took place a total of 87 men, some of whom might have been suitable candidates for the study, had remained beyond the 30-day period in the Reception-Diagnostic Center. It was felt that the environ- ment in the Reception-Diagnostic Center is quite different from the general prison, and, accordingly, they were elimi- nated. TWenty-seven men had to be eliminated from the study because it appeared most likely that they would be trans- ferred out of the institution to another penal installation, or perhaps even released on parole or discharged before they had completed one full year of service within the prison walls. A total of 57 men were eliminated from the study #0 primarily because of invalid scores on the Minnesota.Multi- phasic Personality Inventory. Fifty of the 57 presented invalid scores on the initial testing; the remaining seven had initially had valid profiles, but turned in invalid retest profiles. The invalidating criteria were as follows: A.T-score greater than 70 on the "Question" scale, A Tbscore greater than 70 on the "L" scale, and a T-score greater than 80 on the "F" scale. In all, careful scrutiny of the initial sample of 632 men reduced the final acceptable sample to 185. These 185 men, as far as could be determined, met the criteria of being first prison offenders, producing valid initial and retest MMPI profiles, and being likely to remain incarcer- ated within the walls of the institution for a minimum period of one year. Testing Procedure During the man's first week of incarceration in the Reception-Diagnostic Center, the IMinnesota MMltiphasic Personality Inventory is administered in group ferm as described in the test manual (10). The groups generally average 20-30 men, and take the test in a well-lighted quiet room, sitting in chairs with an armrest. The test is administered by inmates Who have been especially trained for this task by the civilian psychologists in the A1 Reception-Diagnostic Center. The tests are also scored by the inmates, and the resultant profiles recorded. For the purposes of this study, the retesting of the selected sample of men was conducted in as similar a fash- ion as possible as the initial testing. The men were again gathered in groups of 20-30, and the test was again admin- istered in accordance with the procedure described in the manual by inmates who had received training and were exper- ienced in the administration of this test. The area used, for testing was well lighted, well ventilated, and quiet, and accordingly, quite similar in these respects to the facilities available in the Reception-Diagnostic Center. The total time spent in retesting was four days, with morn- ing and afternoon sessions each day, the men being permitted to take as long as they needed to complete the test. Since the total sample for this study is made up of twelve month- ly groups, it was felt advisable that a number of men from each monthly group should be present at any one particular testing session, in the event that any unforeseen situation arose which, in some fashion, would tend to invalidate or affect the test results for that particular testing session. In this fashion, the total sample for any particular month would not have been lost, but only a proportionate sample for all twelve months. #2 Composition and Characteristics of the Sample The 185 men in the sample were divided into 12 groups, on the basis of the number of months already spent in pris- on. The question arises whether these 12 groups are come parable with respect to such basic variables as age, race, intelligence, minimum sentence, and.maximum sentence. There would appear to be no reason why the 185 first offenders of the present sample should resemble the prison population as a whole on these variables. Perhaps, first offenders are younger and brighter than a random sample of the total population would be, and it was, in fact, because the first offender was presumed to be in some ways "unique" that so much effort was given to achieving "purity" of sam- ple. 'Whether the 12 groups are comparable, however, is an important question, and evidence will be presented in the next chapter to show that on their.MMPI scores they are. The present section deals with the variables mentioned above. Eggs. The sample of 185 men included 100 Caucasians, 81 Negroes, 3 thicans (possibly part Indian), and 1 Japan- ese. Table I presents the distribution of men of Caucasian and "minority" races in the 12 monthly groups, and shows that there is no statistically significant difference in race distribution among them. 43 TABLE I RACE DISTRIBUTION IN THE 12 STAGGERED GROUPS SELECTED IN TERMS OF TIME OF INITIAL INCARCERATION Mbnths of Imprisonment Race 1 2 3 A 5 6' 7 8 9 10 ll 12 Sum (1;)? 10101296 884108A11100 M## 81-11713 537135 663 85 Sum. 18 1h 19 22 11. 16 15 17 15 1A 10 1A 185 Chi-square=-13.5h-### # Caucasian ## Minority (Negro, Mexican, Japanese) ### If a statistic indicates that the results are signifi- cantly different from chance at between the 5% and 1% levels of confidence, it is followed by a single asterisk *)' if the 1% level is reached, a. double asterisk ** is used. This system of notation will be used for, almost all tabular data presented. .A special footnote of explanation is included whenever a different system is used. The chi-square in this table is 13.5%, Which is not significant; it is there- fore not followed by an asterisk. The twelve monthly groups were also compared in terms of distribution of I.Q. scores. As part of the battery of psychological tests administered to each man at the Reception-Diagnostic Center, one of four measures of intel- ligence is used: The Revised Army Alpha, the Army General Classification Test, the Wechsler-Bellevue Intelligence Scale, Form I, and the California Mental Maturity TGSto Frequently, when time is, at a premium, only the verbal scale of the‘Wechsler-Bellevue is administered. The Army Alphiand the Army General Classification tests are used alternately, a1though.many more Army General Classi- fication tests are administered than are Army Alpha tests. The reason for the alternation in use of these two tests is to guard against the effects of possible coaching of new inmates by men who had taken the test a week or two before. The California.Menta1 Maturity Test is used.main- ly for testing illiterates, while the ‘Wechsler-Bellevue, Form I, is used whenever an individual test seems indi- cated. Because such different instruments were used, it was not possible to do an analysis of variance on intelligence for the 12 groups. Instead, chi-square was used, splitting the sample into "higher" and "lower"-I.Q.Fs, the cut-off point being an I.Q. of 93.5. The chi-square was found to equal 6.A2 which, with 11 df, is not significant at the 5% level. It therefore seems likely that there is no statis- tically significant difference in intelligence among the twelve groups. Table II presents the data. ('1 A5 TABLE.II I.Qp DISTRIBUTION IN THE 12 STAGGERED GROUPS SELECTED IN TERMS OF TIME OF INITIAL INCARCERATION Mbnths of Imprisonment I.Q. 1 2, 3 h 5 6' 7 8 9 10 11 12 Sum 93 or 11 9 10 9 6 6 7 7‘ 8 6 3 7 89 below 9A or 7' 5 9 13 5 10 8 10 7 8 7 7 96 above Sum 18 1h 19 22 ll 16 15 17 15 1A. 10 14. 185 Chi-square= 6.A2 A related background variable is average grade reading level. Because the Primary, Intermediate, and Advanced levels of the Stanford Achievement Test were used, it was again not possible to do an analysis of variance. Instead, the sample was split into a "low" group, consisting of those taking the Primary form and those scoring up to and including 7.9 on the Intermediate form, and a "high" group, consisting of those scoring 8.0 or more on the Intermediate form and those taking the Advanced form. Table III shows the distribution of the reading levels for 18h men; one man had no score available. Again, chi-square is not signif- icant. #6 TABLE III READING LEVEL DISTRIBUTION IN THE 12 STAGGERED . GROUPS SELECTED IN TERMS OF TIME OF INITIAL .INCARCERATION Mbnths of Imprisonment 3.1.. 1 23h5 6'7'891011123um Lovi‘ 7551012 512 796 8A893 Hishfln 991063 8.8966 6.191 Sum 18 1A 19 22; ll 15 15 17 15 1h. 10 14. 18h Chi-square= 16.31 # Reading Level (R.L.) was; measured. by the Stanford - Achievement Test.- sThe "low" group contains those men taking the Primary form and those scoring up to and in- cluding 7.9 on the Intermediate form. £# The "high” group contains men scoring 8.0 and above on the Intermediate form and also those taking the Advanced form. ‘ ~ One of the variables which did lend itself to analy- sis of variance was age, taken to the nearest year. Table IV gives the mean age for each group, and the summary of the statistical analysis. it? TABLE I? MEAN AGES) AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE 12 STAGGERED (moors Months of Imprisonment 1 2; 3 4. 5 ,6 Mean Age 33.61 37.14 38.21 31.50 29.36 36.88 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total Analysis of Variance Source of Variation ‘_df lMean Square F“ Between 1722.551 11' 156.596 2.07 * Within 13085.23 3 173 75.637 Tbtal lh807.784 184. It will be noted that the middle groups are somewhat younger than the others. Thus, the mean age for groups l~4 is 34.99, and that for groups 9-12, 3A.O9; for groups 5-8, it is 32.44. In line with this is the data for minimum and, to some extent, maximum sentences; these variables might well be considered together and are presented in Tables V and VI. (The 6 lifers in the sample were arbi- ‘trarily considered 20-50-year men.) 48 TABLE? MEAN MINIMUM PRISON SENTENCE-S AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE 12.STAGGERED GROUPS Months of Impri sonment l 2 3 it 5 6:_ Mean Min. Sent. 5.78 5.23, 6.87 6.09 2.91 5.38 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total Mean Min. Sent. 3.43; 6.18 5.31 14-.32 81.00 8.43 5.78 Analysis of Variance Source of Variation if; Mean Square F Between 1103.757 11 100.342 4.818 ** Within 3603 .324 173 20.828 Total 4707.081 184 TABLE VI MEAN MAXIMUM PRISON SENTENCES AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE 12 STAGGERED GROUPS Months of Imprisonment 1 2 3 It 5 6 Mean Max. Sent. 15.22 14.36 15.68 15.77 10.46 12.31 7 8 9 10 ll 12 Total Analgysis of Variance Source of Variation __d_f_ Mean Square F Between 1511. 504 11 13 7 . 409 1. 3.46 Within 17661.801 173 102.091 Total 19173 .30 5 184 A9 The F for the minimum sentences is significant, while that for the maximum sentences is not. For both, however, the middle months are again low, as was the case for the age variable. The mean minimum sentence for months 1-4 is 6.24, for months 9-12, 6.38; for the middle months it is 4.65. The figures for maximum sentences are 15.34., 15.73. and 13.42, respectively. The above data suggest that the 5-8 months groups, who entered the prison between June and September, 1956, are somewhat younger and, presumably, committed somewhat less severe crimes than the other men in the sample. Whether this occurs every year during the: summer months, or wheth- er some obscure factor is involved, is not clear, and the writer cannot explain the above figures; however, the- obtained differences do not appear to have influenced the MMPI scores, as the next chapter shows. [1 ,1 CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF THE DATA Initial Test Findings Since this study deals with changes in test scores as a reflection of change in personality adjustment in 185 first prison offenders, it seems desirable to present the initial test findings first, to introduce this sample of men. Presented in the first two columns of Table VII are the means and standard deviations of these 185 men on the 13 scales of the MMPI.# Plotting the obtained mean scores for the total sample of 185 men on the profile analysis blank for the MMPI shows that seven of the clinical scales have mean T-scores between 50 and 60. Two means are be- tween-60 and 70, while the psychopathic deviate mean is just over 70. The most elevated scales are the psycho- pathic deviate and depression. These results are presented graphically in figure one. #All the statistics in this study were computed using raw scores rather than Tbscores, unless otherwise stated. 51 )IID‘II .Uciulb.ifl!,.v.iui I: I cos n z in «ma n 2 com: .9 assume moamom.dam pom mmH u z % sun- saw. so. ss.u mm.om .os.m Hm.sm am 3..” 4mm . 00...”: woé hme N: .d bmdm 82 a--- man. mm. om.m He.sm 04.6 sm.sm em 1...... 0m . .3. 2.3 31mm mmfi .313 3 sun: as . no.1 mm.m mm.oa mm.m sm.oa em a--- mm. «H. om.m «a.mm em.e sm.mm Hz Essa.m mm. mw.mn os.s ss.om mews oo.s~ em 34 are. 3. me.“ wmém can mmém an mo.H ems. no. so.m o.~m ma.m an.mm n **mm.m mum. sm.H oo.m mm.mH 0H.m mm.ma mm mm.a mom. so.a so.s om.ma mm.s sm.ea m mm. «mm. mm.: ma.m oa.o om.m as.m m om.a mom. mm. sm.m mm.m cm.m .sm.e A p cosohommflo oonoaommnum one: .Q.m one: .n.m one: carom the mo .m.m in? assign Harem aovsmm Hmpoe flaw. zomHmm 20523“ 4 mo mmmoom HAZE AstBHZH 72g 979. mamfim Nassam 63.2. ME. mo maroom Hag: Q Emma. E ! n—- H (A .— )— O b— O 0" § (.0 U" 8 co 0" 8 \‘l (J! \J O - 45— - - 35 — ' 50- 45 - _ - - ' : 50— - : ' 35- 40— U‘ o I IL (1" \1 o I nullnullnol'1111|1111'1111'.... ~~-—120 {-115 l H _ O O 0" § 8 8 22 on O 3 3 8 8: 8 8 .11l1111l1111I1111I1111I1111 1111I1111l111|I1111|1111|1111'1111'1111'1111I1111 8 w o l I 20- 8 8 1 l V . . § . I I I . i I l 1 1 10— 15_ 15-_ _ : _ - ‘ : 15.- 7 - ' ' 10— ' 15". s— 10— ‘ - 3 on D.’ o 1111111111111'1111'1 8 l I o l A o 111|1111|1111I111 Em "sf-es if... —:§-ss see 20—33—45 -f-§—4o IO—Ei—35 5::—30 23.25 in ‘-0 TorTc ? L F K Hs+.5K D Hy Pd+.4l( M1 Pa PtHK Sc+lK Ma‘+.2K Si TorTc 1.51 14.84 22.69 27.60 10.94 27.3t 27.81 5.71 15.23 21.83 23.91 28.11 20.37 THE MEAN INITIAL MMPI PROFILE EoR IREtnxmu.SANPLE Mean Raw Scores FIGURE 1 52 53 Comparison of Study Sample with a Random Sample of Prison Inmates A great deal of attention had been given to sampling procedures in the present study, on the assumption that first prison offenders differed from the general prison population. Do they? Is the sample of 185 men different from a random sample of prison inmates? Data were gathered on one-hundred men who were admitted to the Reception-Diagnostic Center during the months of Feb- ruary and March of 1956. This sample of one-hundred was composed of 50 white and 50 Negro offenders. Every tenth Negro and every tenth white inmate admitted were included in the sample until a total of 100 men was obtained. This group may be considered a random.samp1e of prison inmates, some of whom have had considerable contact with penal institutions and others of whom have had little or no contact at all. In the third and fourth columns of Table VII are presented the means and standard deviations for this random sample of 100 prisoners. When studying the obtained means one is immediately struck by the elevated Pd scale. Statistical analysis of the differences between the study sample and the general prison population sample is presented in the last three columns of Table VII. Mean differences were obtained by subtracting the random sample mean from the study sample 54 means; if the mean for the random sample was the larger one, the difference is negative. The results obtained indicate that first prison offend- ers do indeed tend to score significantly lower on the Pd scale and almost significantly lower (6% level) on the Ma scale. First prison offenders also score significantly high- er on the Hs scale, as a group, than do general prisoners. It may also be noted that the L and K scales ShOW'a tendency to be higher with first prison offenders; these findings ap- proach significance at the seven per cent level. None of the other differences between the two groups approach sig- nificance. Retest Findings Table VII presented the initial test scores obtained by the men on admission to prison. In Table VIII the data obtained on retesting is presented. IMeans and standard deviations on each of the scales are presented. TABLE VIII MEAN RETEST SCORES AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS ON 'fl-IE MMPI SCALES FOR THE TOTAL SAMPLE OF FIRST PRISON OFFENDERS# CD 0 I3 . 55 19%,: Scale Mean L 5.28 2.38 F 4.29 2.89 K 17.62 4.79 D 20.92 4.75 Hy 21.85 5.66 Mf 23 .17 4. 23 Pa 10025 2093 Pt 27.09 4.89 SC 260A? 5ohl Ma 19. 56 4. 21 Si 25.81 8.58 H ##J-..pnm # N = 185 for all scales *W-w-u n‘-h_—hu__‘=_v ... ._—- This table suggests that considerable changes have oc- curred between the initial and the second test. For each man, a change score was obtained for each scale; in each case, the initial test score was subtracted from the re- test score, so that a change score might be either a posi- tive number or a negative number or zero. Mean change scores 'were then computed, as were standard deviations, standard errors, and t's. In Table II these results are presented, which show that nine of the thirteen.MMPI scales did change significantly, while the changes on two other scales ap- proached significance. 56 TABLE IX MEAN DIFFERENCES BETWEEN INITIAL AND RETEST SCORES ON THE MMPI SCALES FOR THE TOTAL SAMPLE OF FIRST PRISON OFF ENDERS# . - - §.E. of-theee Scale Mean Difference## S.D. difference t L +.692 2.15 .158 4. 38** F -l.422 2.78 .205 6. 94** K +2.778 4.12 .304 9.14** Hs -.599 4.36 .321 1.87 D ‘10768 4056 0336 5026“ Hy +-124 5.07 .374 --.... Pd -.303 4.53 .335 ---- MI -.773 3.8 .286 2.70** Pa -.686 3.65 .269 2.55** pt -l.016 5.67 .413 2.§3* Sc -.870 éosh OH82 10 1 Ma ”0811 3094 0290 2080** 31 -2.000 5.47 .403 4.96“ # N = 185 for all scales except L, when N = 182. ## Differences were obtained by subtracting initial scores from retest scores. As far as the validity scales are concerned, the L and K scales increased significantly while the F scale decreased significantly. In other words, mean L and K scores went up after incarceration, while the mean F scOre went down. Of the clinical scales only the Hy and Pd scales showed Changes which do not even approach significance; the other clinical scales all showed mean decreases. For the Sc scale the de- crease approaches significance at the seven per cent level, for He at the six per cent level; for the other scales it is 57 significant at the five per cent level or less. This means that mean scale scores were higher on the initial test than on the retest; in other words, mean scores went down after incarceration. In Figure 2 are presented in graphic form the results of the retest. Initial test scores are inclu- ded to facilitate comparison. ; E o-' - — - _ - 2; 25‘; Initial Test - : 10- i - ' 3-25 20—3-—-- RGDGS‘D _ __ 0— ~--- > -- - ~ ' - .5—1. }20 o—' 1—0 TorTc ? 1. F K Hs+.5K D Hy Pd+.4K M1 Po Pslk Sc+11< Mo+.2K 8. Torr. Initial 0.51. 14.84 22.69 27.60 10.91. 27.31. 27.81 5.71 15.23 21.83 235.94 28.11 20.37 Retest 5.28 17.62 20.92 27.29 10.25 26.47 25.81 4.29 14.63,- 21.85 23.17 27.09 19.56 MMPI Raw Scores; FIGURE 2 COMPARISON OF THE MEAN INITIAL TEST mm PROFILE WITH THE MEAN RETEST PROFILE FOR THE TOTAL SAMPLE 58 Comparability of the Twelve Groups with Respect to MMPI Data In the preceding section, it was demonstrated that significant changes occurred between the initial test and the retest. The study was designed to facilitate the deter- mination of whether different time intervals in prison are related to different personality changes. It was for this reason that the total sample was divided into twelve groups, each group representing a different period of in- carceration. Before one can proceed, then, one must first ascertain whether or not the twelve monthly groups were com- parable initially as far as MMPI scores are concerned. In Table X are presented the means, standard deviations, and F's (analysis of variance) for the thirteen scales. — TABLE X IMEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR EACH OF THE MMPI SCALES ON THE INITIAL TEST FOR THE TWELVE SELECTED GROUPS TABLE X-A. The L Scale A I 591' fl fi‘fi "Months in Prison" 'N' " "‘ Mean" 1 S.D. ' 1' 18 4.11 2.33. A 2 14 4.21 1.74 4 22 5.36 2.51 5 11 3.00 1.48 6 16 5.31 2.76 7 15 5.00 1.93 8 17 4.12 1.59 9 15 4.00 2.07 10 14 5.14 2.56 11 10 5.00 2.57 12 11 3.55 1.57 Total 182 4.54 2.30 Analysis of Varianqg Source of Variation _ df ...... MeapJSQy‘arrg" F Between 85.204 11 7.745' 1.505 Within 876.027 170 5.153 Total 961.231 181 __A __ ‘— —-4:____o.~A f H...- A .. 1 TABLE X-B. The F Scale Months in Prison N ' ' Mean ' $.11.th 1 '18" '6.55 3.34 2 14 4.14 2.30 A a 2:8 81-1: 6 16 6. 06 3.63 7 15 5.93 3.71 8 17 4.99 2.28 9 15 7.39 2.82 10 14 5.14 3.46 11 10 .20 3.12 12 14 .21 1.74 Total 185 5.71 3.20 ‘ Analysis of VarianCe " ' Source of Variation Mean Sguage ---. F _ Between 135.763 12.3420 1.22 ' Within 1752.475 173 10.1299 Total 1888.238 184 TABLE X-C. The K Scale Months in Prison N . Mean; S.D. 1 18 13.28 1.19 2 14 16.33 4 47 3 19 15.37 4.58 4 22 16.81 3 49 5 11 13.64 4.12 6 16 15.19 3.64 7 15 14.60 5.00 8 17 14.18 4 30 9 15 12.60 3. 72 10 14 16.36 3.15 11 10 15.30 5.12 12 14 14.21 4.21. Tbtal j‘ 185 Al4.84 -1. 4. 38 8 Analysis of Variance . Source of Variation Meang§guare __'F_r_ Between 289.1%8 26.2861 1.39 Within 3255 9 7 173 18.8207 Total 3545.135 134 -.-..- ‘_'—v- TABLE XED. The Hs Scale _ 111 Months in Prison 8 N. - Mean - *4 S.D. 1 18 15.61 1.11 2 14 14.85 5.15 3 19 17.11 3.63 4 22 16.27 5.61 5 11 12.91 5.00 6 16 14.31 5.50 7 15 14.89 3.38 8 17 14.35 5.20 9 15 14.79 5.13 10 14 17.78 5.95 11 10 12.80 4.92 12 14 15.07 4.77 Total 185 15.23 5.10 ‘_ Aaelxsi§_ei;EeIieass Source of Variatigngwwggfl;v ' MQQQLSQuargwgr_ F Between 3 0.435 11 30.9486 1.19 Tbtal 4803.005 184 TABLE X-E. The I) Scale Months in Prison '. 'N Mean ' ' ' S.D. ' ' ’ 1' 18 ' 22.17 ‘ 6.20 2 14 21.57 3.16 3 19 22.99 4.75 4 22 24.05 5.00 5 11 23.73 5.24 6 16 24.63 5.53 7 15 22.27 6.0 8 17 21.41 3.70 9 15 23.59 5.50 10 14 24.14 4.58 11 10 19.90 2.51 12 14 20. 3 5.00 Anal sis Of Variance Source of Variation df IMeanISQuare F Between 358.305' ' 11 '32.5731 1.24 Within 4551.511 173 26.3093 . Tbtal 184 —'_‘A __.L_— M— 4909.816 TABLE 19?. The Hy Scale BOtween . . .‘138 931,_ ....... 11 ....... 12.. 63m ...... 0'..£5. Within 4854.871. 173 28.062 8 Tbtal 4993. 805 184 _* _‘ ............................................... TABLE 156. The Pd Scale Months in mean 'N ‘ """ Mean """ ' ’ ‘ S.D. ' ' ' .......... 17 ififfflffffiiéfff.....gz‘gg. ..ffff.fi‘éo* 2 . . 3 19 28.05 4.16 4 22 28.36 4.31 5 11 30.36 5. 5 6 16 26.13 4.70 g 15 28.13 3.18 17 26.88 3.92 9 15 28.33 3.96 10 14 2Z.21 4.06 11 10 2 .60 5.22 12 111- 27993 “955 __ Total 185 27.60 4.1.3 .................. anal'316"r'var1a"""'“""""""' figce gt Va__r1at;' cg """ g """ Me egg Sggarg 2 Between ' 208. 623 ' ”"11 """" 18.965 """ 0.96 Within 3 27.972 173 19.81 Tbtal 3 36.595 184 ........................................................ 63 TABLE L3. be Hf Scale Months in Prison N Mean 8. D. """ 1 ' ' ' 18 24.78 4.47 2 11. 22.64 3.99 3 19 23.21 5.02 4 22 24.73 3.076 5 11 23.09 4.10 6 16 23.31 3.16 7 15 26.79 6.32 8 17 23.41 4.79 9 15 24.59 4. 7 10 14 23.07 3. 1 11 10 25.00 4.60 12 14 22.28 3.22 Tbtal 185 23.94 ........ AnalISis‘ of Variance ' ' e of Variation ' ' df‘ ' Me‘an Between""268.248 """" 11" 24.3861 """ 1.190 Within 3544.098 173 20.4861 Total 4» 3812.346 184 1 TABLE X-I. The Pa Scale Months in Prison ' ‘ I Mean S.D. ......... 1"7187' “711;"? "mi“. 15» 4 oo 2 9 10 11 Between' ' 123. 037 """ 11' Within 2213.309 173 11.1851 """ 0.87 ' 12. 7936 ..... fiTABLE X-Ja The Pt Scale .......... 1 """"'l8"" "'28.72‘ . ""'6‘97 2 14 26.99 3. 78 3 19 28.89 5.41 4 22 29.82 6. 56 5 11 30.45 4.32 6 16 27.38 5.49 7 15 .19 5. 8 17 26.24 5.64 9 15 29.27 .09 10 14 27.99 5.54 11 10 25.60 5.73 12 14 26.49 5.26 Total 185 28.11 5.73 .... Anal is f Vari .................... urce of Vari t 0 "df "JMe' uare Between""168.394 """" "" "15.3085 """ 0.448 within 5901.333 133 34.1124 ' Total 6069. aaaaaaaaaaa TABLE XbK. The Sc Scale Months in Mason ’ ' ’ ‘N' """" Mean """""" S.D. ' ’ ' ,. .. 1 .......... 18" .. 27.11 . "'5.65"' 2 14 28.099, 5.11 3 19 2 .58 5.99 2* ii .3. :12 6 16 26.28 6.00 7 15 5.73 3 17 25.99 5.21 9 15 29.07 7. 6 10 14 28.99 6.92 11 10 25.80 7.78 12 1 25: 99 .2 not...“ 320.321 """"""" 29.1200 " ' ‘ ' 0.680 Within 7406,9011? 42.8140 Totah‘ 7727.222 # 1 ...................................................... TABLE LL. 1110 Ma Scale _ Months 11: P216616 N ' “711082 773.1). '1 __ 7 “18 20.67 6.01 2 11. 20.28 5.23 3 19 20.99 2.12 3 32 2:32 33: 6 16 18350 2.220 3 15 20.07 3.63 17 19.94. 5.? 9 15 21.53 3. 06 10 11 20. 1.. 11 10 21.30 3.93 12 11. 22.57 .19 26021 185 20.37 6.62 . 2621 818 “r Vari co _ 7 area V t1 '. 'df ’Mé 8 ar F Botwe'o'n" 207.86 '11 18.8970 '0'.958 Within 32.13 3.39 173 19.7306 Total 21.265 181. _; 1:81.13 Lid. 1110 31: w$02110 _ ' ' months 111 22166 ' 'N """"" Mo'an' S.D. fl 7'1 m f18 29.28 7' is" 2 14 26023 7033 3 19 31.3 9.13 I. 5.61 5 .56 2 3'2 8 6256 9 9.71» 10 5053 ‘ 11 6.1.2 12 8.38 26621 8.2.0; 0 of. V Between ' 917.60 """"" 11' 8"." ’0 1.188 17161310 121 2 .763 173 76.11834 Total 13 .378 181. A .h—‘A —— —'———-——+ 66 Tables X-A through XpMIshow that none of the F's reach significance. This would seem to indicate that, for any given scale, variation.among the months is no greater than would be eXpected by chance, and that the months are com! parable on each of the 13 MMPI scales. Retest Data for the Twelve Monthly Groups Since the 12 samples are comparable as to initial MMPI scores, the retest scores and the change scores may be analyzed in like manner, again using the analysis of variance. Table XI presents means, standard deviations, and F's for all 13 Scales. TABLE XI .MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR EACH OF THE MMPI SCALES ON THE RETEST FOR THE TWELVE SELECTED GROUPS TABLE XI-A. The L Scale Mbnths in Prison‘ N lMean S.D. l 18 5.33 2.60 ' 2 14 6.07 2.28 3 19 5.42 2.AA # 22 5.77 2.h3 5 11 4.55 1.62 6 16 5.38 2.23 7 15 5.60 2.15 8 17 4.65 2.38 9 15 4.13 1. 6 10 1h 5oh3 2.23 ll 10 5.30 2.61 12 1h 4.82 2.09 Total 185 5.28 2.3# ' Analysis of Variance Source of Variation df IMean Square F Between h9.08l ll h.h62 .798 Within 967.860 173 5.595 Total 1016.9h1 18h EABLECXI-B. The E Scale 60 Months in Prison N Mban S.D. l 18 5.hh 3.2h 2 14 3.93 2.h3 3 19 5.21 3.h9 A 22 4.09 2.#3 6 16 An63 3.37 7 15 #oh? 3.03 8 17 2.77 1.16 9 l5 Soho 3.07 10 14 3.36 2.71 11 10 h.10 3.30 12. 1h 3.93 2.22 metal 185 h.29 2.89 Analysis of Variance Source of Variation df Mean Square F Between 123.556 11 1.369 ‘Within 1118.262 173 TABLE XI-G. The K Scale Months in Prison N Mean S.D. 1 18 16.83 h.91 2 1h 19.36 5.16 3 19 17.11 hah? A 22 19.32 h.19 5 11 17.18 h.86 6 16 18.75 4.55 7 15 15.60 4.50 8 17 17.61 3.76 9 15 1h.73 6.75 10 1h 17.63 6.45 11 10 17.70 5.25 12 16 19.36 6.60 Total 185 17.62 4.79 Analysis of variance Source of Variation d£ IMean Square: F Between 373.660 11 1.518 Within 3870.091 173 total #243.751 184. RABLELXI-Bm The EssScale Months in Prison H Mean 3.13. 1 18 16.06, 6.32 2. 16 15.50 6.08 3 19 16.82 ‘ 3.56 A. 22 15.68 4.12 5 11 12.73 4.81 a 16 14.00 A. 69 7' 15 13 o 87 [in 11 8 17 13.77 3.72 9 15 14033 #039 10 16. 15.00 6.26 11 10 13.70 4.27 12 14- 12.57 3.06 flotal 185 16.63. 4.53 Analysis of Variance Source of Variation di mean Square F Between 271.317 11 2h.665 1.213 ‘Within 3517.688 173 20.333 Total 3789.005 18%- TABLE XI’Eo The D-Scale Months in Prison N Nman. S.D. 1 18 21.56 7.36 2- 16 21.93 4.92 3 19 22058 3039 A. 22 21045 305h 5 11 18073 3014 6 16 21.25 5.03 g 15 21.07 “.81 17 19.18 6.68 9 15 21.20 4.18 10 1h 21.00 4.60 11 10 21.00 3.7& 12 16 18.86 A.00 Total 185 20.92 2.75 Analysis of Variance Source of Variation dfl' lMean Square F Between 267.623 11 223511 .992 Within 3926.161 173 22.695 fatal “735.7814. 131’» TABLE XIAE. Ihe Hy Scale Months in Prison N Mean S.D. 1 18 22.67 7.60 " 3, 19 21..ll 5.86 lb, 22 22. 5 5 5 o 29 5 11 18. 91 19.30 f; S 22%; ‘83 8. 17 18:18 6:81 9 15 21.60 4.62 10 11. 22.13 5.60 11 10 21.70 4.65 12 16 21.28 3.01 Total 185 21.85 5.66 Analysis of variance Sourceaof variation dfi‘ Mean Square E Between h8h.35h. 11 46.0321 1.398 Within 51.69408 173 31.1.99!» Iotal 5933.762 13#- TABLE XI-G. The Pd.Sca1e Mbnths in Prison N Mban S.D. 1' 18 28.00 6.66 2 la. 27.07 5.06 3 l9 27.#7 3.53 h 22 27.65 3.33 5 11 28.27 1.22 6 16 27.31 6.52 g 15 28.23 b.37 17 26.61 3.09 9 15 26.h0 b.36 10 11 27.21 6.3%» 11 10 26.50 h.32 12 16 26.63 6.59 Total 185 27.29 M‘r Analysis of variance Source of Variation df mean Sguare F Betwe en 9,-1.0 560 11 8 o 5 963 0 o #5 9 Within 3233.678 173 18.6917 Ibtal 3328.238 184 IABLEMXI-H. Thele Scale Mbnths in Prison N. .Mban S.D. 1 18 23.91, 3.93 2 11 22.28 1.06, 3 19 23.26 1.30 In, 22 23'. 95 It. 50 5 11 23.00 1.05 6 16 22.75 2.70 7 15 26.53 1.53 8 17 21.00 3.7 9 15 23.13 8.1 10 11 22.57 1.11 11 10 21.20 1.33 12. 11 21.21 2.81 Total 185 23.17 1.23 Analysis of variance Seurce of variation df’ Mban Sguare 1 Between 357.510 11. 32.5009 1.903* Within 2956.295 173 17.0881 EABLE XI-I. The Pa Scale Months in Prison N Mean S.D. 1 18 10.72 2.88 2 11 10.21 2.10 3 19 10.53 2.76 1. 22 10.05 2.72 5) ll 9 o 18 20 89 6. 16 10.062 2.16 7 15 11.20 2.79 8 17 9.88 3.25 9 15 10.27 2.98 10 1A.» 11. 21 3 03 8 11 10 10.10 3.17 12 11 9.07 2.74 Iotal 185 10.25 8058 Analysis of variance Source of Variation df .mean Square F Between 68.010 11 6.1850 0.701. Within 1519.019 173 8.7801 Total 1587.181 181. TKBLELXI-J. The Pt Scale Months in Prison N Mean ‘ S.D. 1 18 29.22 6.43 2 11. 270 85 3091 3 19 26.7 3.81 1- 22 27.6 5.77 5 ll 25 055 llro 25 6 16 27.19 3.91 7' 15 27.17 5.00 8 17 26.21 1. 81 9 15 28.33 1.21 10 11 26.21 1.43 11 10 26.20 5.19 12 11. 25.07 3.60 Total 185 27.09 1.89 Analysis of Variance Source of variation df Mban Square P Between 239.978 11 ‘ 21.8161 0.901 Within 1173.160 173 21.1210 Tetal 1113.133 181 TABLE XI-K. The Sc.Sca1e Months in Prison N Mean S.D. 1 18 26.99 6.80 2 11 27.07 2.91 3 19 27.16 5.11 1. 22 26.59 5.23 5 ll 2 045 live 8‘} 6 16 .25 5.15 g 15 27.73 6.83 17 21.88 5.25 9 15 26.87 1.60 10 11- 27.28 3.75 11 10 26.70 7.98 12 11 21.99 3.63 Tetal 185~ 26.16 5.11 Analysis of Variance Source of Variation df Mean s'quang F Between 171.132 11 ‘ 15.8301 0.523 'Within 5233.890 173 30.2536 Total 5108.022 181 TABLE XI—L. The.Ma Scale Months in Prison N Mean 3 0D. 1 18 20.8 g i" 2 11 18.1% 3.53 3 19 19.79 3.30 lg. 22 19.18 #035 5 11 19.91 1.62 6 16 19.38 3.18 7 15 18.73 5.29 8 17 19.21. 1.21 9 15 20.07 3.35 10 11 20.07 1. 8 11 10 19.80 3.57 12 11- 19.36 1.18 Total 185 19.56 1.21 Analysis of Variance Source of Variation df Mean Square F Between 73.816 11 6.7132 0.363 Within 3197.689 173 18.1837 Total 3271.535 184- TABLE XI -M. The Si Scale Months in Prison N’ mean S.D. 1 18 27.61 10.89 2 11+ 25 071 96 87 3 19 28.16 8.91. 1 22 23.95 7.12 5 11 21.61 8.05 6 16 21.88 7.87 7 15 29.87 6.25 8 17 25.99 8.55 9 15 29.87 8.91 11 10 22.20 1.19 12 11 18.57 1.10 Total 185 25.81 8.58 Analysis of Variance Source of Variation df JMean Square F Between 1628.613 11 118.0557 2.131 * Within 12003.765 173 69.3859 Total 13632.378 181 73 Two of the F’s attained significance on the retest, that for the.Mf‘ scale and that for the Si scale. Bartlett’s test for homogeneity of variance was performed for these two scales (7). A.chi-square of 7.77 was obtained for the MI scale,and this is not significant; the chi-square of 19.81 obtained for the Si scale is significant, indicat- ing that on this scale the variances were not homogeneous. Because it seemed important to know which months were significantly different from which other months, and because Bartlett's test indicated heterogeneous variance along the Si scale, t's were calculated for these two scales, compar- ing each month to every other month. Of the 66 t's calcu- lated for the Mf scale, 12 are significant.# The highest le scores were obtained by men incarcerated for 7 months. The mean score for these men is significantly different from that of men incarcerated 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, and 12 months. The lowesthf scores were obtained among men incar- cerated 8 months, and their mean score differed significant- ly from men incarcerated 1, 1, and 11 months. The second lowest mean scores were achieved by men incarcerated 12 months, and their scores differed significantly from those incarcer- ated 1 and 1.months. Generally speaking, then, the higher meanle scores differed significantly from the lower mean Mf scores; however, there does not seem to be a clear rela- tionship between time imprisoned and.ME'scores. Figure 3 #TBy chance alone, 3 or 1 would.have been significant. Ill: :1 Jill]! 71 demonstrates this graphically. Months in Prison 1 2 3 1 5'6"7"8"9"10 ll 12 — vw‘ WWV ‘— 27- 26+ 254 Mean Mf Scores \ 23-1 / ' 22- 21'! 20- Figure 3 MEAN MF SCORES .ON RETEST AMONG THE ‘IWELVE GROUPS A similar analysis was made for the Si scale. Fifteen of the 66 t's were significant. Ten of these t's involve the group of men who had been in the prison 12 months. They had by far the lowest Si scores, and differed significantly from men incarcerated 1, 2, 3, 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 months. The next lowest mean Si score was obtained from the group of men incarcerated 11 months, and they differed significantly from men incarcerated 7 and 9 months. The four month group, with the third lowest mean, differed signifi- cantly from groups 7, 9, and 10. The 7-month and 9-month groups have identical means, which are the highest of all the Si means. Generally, these comparisons migmt be summar- ized by saying that the 11 and 12 months groups are strik- 75 ingly low in their Si scores, and that they tend to differ from the other months significantly. The two months with the highest Si scores differ significantly from the three months obtaining the lowest mean Si scores. Once again, however, there does not seem to be a clear relationship be- tween months imprisoned and 81 score. Figure 1 demonstrates this graphically. months in Prison 1231'56789'101112 30- 29" 28- 27- 26- 25- Mean Si Scores 21- 23- 22- Figure 1 MEAN SI SCORES 0N RETEST AMONG THE TWELVE GROUPS 76 Generally, then, it may be said that the MMPI retest scores do not show a clear relationship to months spent in prison. Eleven of the 13 scales show no differences among the 12' monthly groups, while the other 2 scales, the Mf and the Si scales, do show significant differences among these groups, but not in any way which would suggest a sim- ple relationship between personality and time spent in prison. Changes in MMPI Scores Change scores were analyzed exactly as retest scores were. Table III presents the data for change scores. Once again, a negative change score means that the initial score was higher than the retest score. 80 that the monthly means for all the scales might be considered together ,this table is arranged somewhat differently from Tables X and II. The mean changes are presented first. In Table XIII are presented, for each scale separately, the standard deviations and analyses of variance. 7. 7 .mmmlzeumns A 3888 momma fine :0 3.7.2 Henna . .filz 93:3 A £838 common .2...» so emlz .NH 96.5 nob ...ooswmnees: one and." no H653” mm on» as open Sou.“ newsman? hmpqmoflwsmmn newsman $3...” $5” om ...: mm 3 mm 3 i .3” &N 3 mm . .3” mm Hz 8.? 3......" and- 3... 3... 8.? ma... flaw“. 8.? .N- qumu Q..- 8.? am .36.... mmdwn Oman... .8... Sent .23.... mafia: mm... .3... .3... .34... 3...... 5.... s2 emf.-. 00.7 60.... .327 om.m.. «1.7 mm... mm... mm.ml :27 N44... .No.m+ .3... em «0...... .317. do... 3...": m ... 00. mm... mm... was.“ Sum! 31m... om... 0m... 3 mg... 2.27 On... mm... om.m.. mam... mm... 13... .327. no.7 mm... 8...”... 3... mm 3.1.. 3.7 8... on... SA- 13.. S... R... a... R... a... on... m .. as on... 32m... 3...... 00. an. .3... on... 3...”... ocean .3... mm... sot—u... mm... Pm «a... 8.. 8.. 8. . an..- 3.? 5.. 34.3.7 8.? 3:2. 84. .34. em Nuflmu P27 34. mmqwu mile..." $de 8.? find” 84w” 8.? as... am... 3... a on... Onto... om... a.ml he... be... 0027 mm... mm... mm... mm... 3.... 13.... mm flaw “imam“ maid“ out? «mum... $de 84. fidmu find“ Rd. $4?” fidm... 3.? a mmmfl mm...“ 3.- fialmn 8.? film.” $27 $3” 8.? 13.. New... .3... .327 1 mg...“ Medan... on... 8.. 3.. mm... 8.. 8.. film... 3.. mm... 84. «NJ. .... .mmpoa NH .3” om m w . h . o m a m N .n omsom sonmhm s.“ mnasoz $888 “message meg as new smegma 83 as $3 .385 ale 28.58 888 Has en 8848 Ems 5.35 78 IADLE: XIII SIANDARD DEVIATIONS AND ANALYSES OF VARIANCE OF THE MMPI CHANGE SCORES BETWEEN THE INIIIAL IESI AND THE REIESI FOR THE IwELVE STAGGERED GROUPS TABLE XIII-A. The L Scale M10 n t;h a. i n. P r 1.3 ozn 1 2 .3 .fi: 5 6 . Standard Deviation 2.25 1.17 2.16 1.58 1.97 2.19 7 3- _9 10 ll 12 Total Standard DGViation 1.66 2.33 2003 2.70 2.14.1 1.81 2015 Analysis:of variance Source of variation df‘ , Mban Square F Between 53.023 11. 4.822 1.039 Within 788.935 170 2.61.1 Intal 821.978 181 TABLE XIII-B. The F Scale: M20 n t;h s; i.n P r-i a;o:n 1 2 3 ll.» ' 5 6 Standard DBViation 2083 2011-8 3007 3023) 20421 2603 41; 8 9' 10 ll 12 Total Standard Deviation 2. 68 2.26 3.10 2. 30 2. 81 2.66 2.78 Ana1ysis of variance Source of Variation df lean Square F Between 78.293 11 7.117 «.907 Within 13 56.821 173 7.81.3, Ibtal lk35.llh 18A. TABLE XIII-G. II‘he K Scale Months in Prison 1 2. 43 A; 5 6 Standard Deviation 505A 4067 3.h8 30A“ #023 3089 7 8- 9 10 ll 12 30158.1 Standard Deviation 3 . 63 3 .67 3 .34 3 o 73 2. 58 held; 4.12 Analysis of variance Source of Variation df Mean Square E Between 712.272 11 67. 79 #.861** Within 2401.642 173'. 13 . 82 Tetal 31h3.91h 18h TABLE XIII-D. The BS Scale Months; in Prison 1. :a 3 1g " 5 I ' 6 Standard Deviation 4.3 8 l...Ol 1. 75 5 o 52 3 .33 3 o 72 l 8- 9 10 ll 12 Total Standard Deviation #052 4.08 2099 #089 #015 5077 #036 Analysis of Variance Source of Variation df Mean Square F Between 187 . 5 20 ll 17. 04.7 ‘ .8814, Within 3331». 880 173 19 . 277 Total 3 522.400 181; DABLE XIII-E. the D Scale Mio n t.h s iwn P r-i 340 n 1. 2 .3 k: 5 6- Standard Deviation “012 “.91 31086 #076 509‘} 3050 _Z 8 49 10 11 12 Total Standard Deviation n.18 A.Ol 3.12 h.31 3.59 #.72 ho56 gnalysis of variance Source of variation d£‘ Mban Square F Between 1.16.711 11 37.883 L916“ Within 3 20.291 173 19.770 Tetal 3 7.005 181 TABLE XIIIAF. The Hy Scale l[01n.t.h.s; i n P r*i sso n 1 2 g I. 5. 6 Standard Deviation 5.12 1.58 3.75 5.16 6.231 4.83 8 10 11 12 Total Standard Deviation a. gnalysis of variance Source of Variation df Mean Sguare F Between 221.861 11_ 20.169 .769 Within h536.280 173 26.221 Ibtal 6758.111 184. EIBLE‘XIII-G. The Pd Scale Mio n t,h s i n P r i s o n l 21 _3 4: 5 6 Standard Deviation 6.73 5.59 3.17 4.25 #.hh 5.59 7 8? #9. 10 11. 12 Tbtal Standard Deviation 4.77 h.82 3.28 3.87 3.83 3.85 4.51 Analysis of variance Source of variation df Mban Square F Between 16.951 11 1.5109 0.074 ‘Within 3607.006 173 20.8497 IOtal 380900h9 18A TABLE XIII-H. fhe MT Scale Mio n t h s. i.n P r~i s o n 1 2 3 It 5 6 Standard DGViation 30kg 2069 #032 3066 309“- 2037 #1, 8 #9 10 ll 12 Total Standard DBViation 3096 A070 #069 3004 #087 3058 3088 Analysis of variance Source of variation df IMean Square F Between 80.279 11 7.2980 0.h67 Within 2701.186 173 15.6311 Total 2784.665 18A. 82 TABLE XIII-I. The Pa Scale Mio n t.h s; i n P r i sso n l 2 33 lb 5 6 Standard Deviation 2.50 3.05 3.82 2.71 3.20 3.16 #19 8 9 10 11 12 Total Standard Deviation 3.30 4.#5 ho97 3.03 2.67 3.47 3.65 Analysis of variance Source of variation df Mban Square F Between 12 .936 11 11.3578 0.81.0 Within 233 .880 173 13.5195 Total 21.63: . 816 181.. TABLE.XIII-J. The Pt Scale. 1M 0 n t.h s i n P'r i s o n 1 2 3 ' I. l 5 ‘ 6 Standard Deviation 8.32 5.37 3.53 7.87 5.87 5.63 J 8 9 10 11 12 Total Standard Deviation 3.75 6.79 8.82 5.35 n.86 4.30 5.67 Analysis of variance Source of variation df JMean Square F Between 376.226 11 3h.2018 1.0631 Total 5980.951 18h 83 TABLE XIII-K. The Sc Scale Mic n t h s i n P'r i sso n 1 . 2 . .3 . . 1. . 5 6 Standard Deviation 5.82 5.11 1.95 7.36 6.28 7.73 _7 8 9 10 11 12 Total Standard Deviation 5.80 6.58 5.67 7.20 7.98 5.81 6.51 AfléllEiS of variance Source q§_variation df mean Square F ‘__ Between 267.611 11 25.1191 0.5701 Within 7631.215 173 h1.1112 Tbtal 7907.886 181 TABLE XIII-L. The M8 Scale Mio n t h s i n P r i szo n l 2 3 1: 5 6 Standard Deviation 1.02 3.66 3.21 3.56 1.10 3.18 7 8 49 10 ll 12 Total Standard Deviation 1.19 1.65 3.65 1.13 3.29 3.23 3o9h Analysis of variance Source of variation df .Mean Square F Between 205.116 11 18.6769 1.211 Within 2662.933 173 15.3926 Total 2868.379 181. 81 TABLE IIIIeM; The Si Scale wa'f'2'7'-;L:Tf'u+f'-';'_’fua Standard Deflation 5 0 733 5 0 22+ #065 1&0 82 5 0 96 3 067 7‘ 8 9 10 11 12 Total Standard Deviation 6.31 5.00, 5.21 1.37 6161. 6.07 5.17 Analysis of variance Source of variation df Imean Square P Between 376.180 11 31.2251 1.1171 Within 5161.520 173 29.8353 Total 5538.000 181 It is noteworthy that the F's fer thele’and Si scales are not significant for the change scores. Thus, while the retest scores are different among the 12:month group for these two scales, the changes from the initial test scores are not different among the 12 monthly groups; on two other scales, however, they are. These two are the K and D scales. Bartlett's test was calculated fer both of these scales; for the K scale, the chi-square is 11.01, and for the D scale, it is 11.96; neither of these chi- squares is significant. Sixty-six ‘t-scores 'were then come puted for each of’ these variables, as for the le and Si scales above. For the K scale, only 3 of these t’s were significant. By far the highest change in.K score was ob- tained by the men incarcerated 12 months. These men changed a c u a n .7 l D I I 1" F . c - l' 1‘ a C . .. 0 . . .v , . \ \ ’ I A \ . ‘ , \ '7 0 . \ . u 5 ¢ \ 85 on K significantly more than did men incarcerated 7 months, 10‘months, and 3 months; these three groups had the lowest mean changes on the K scale. None of the other comparisons yielded significant t's. While it may seem suggestive that the greatest increase in K is manifested by the men incar- cerated a full year, the fact that the 3, 7, and 10 months groups show the least increase in K score would tend to rule out any clear-cut relationship between time imprisoned and increase in K score. Figure 5 presents these results graphically. Months in Prison 1 2 3fl_1 5, 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 .Mean Changes 3.00m in K Scores 2 50-. (0 Figure 5 MEAN GHANGES IN K SCORES FOR THE TWELVE STAGGERED MONTHLY GROUPS# # Significant changes are indicated by X, non-significant changes by 0. 86 Changes in.D scores also varied from.month to month. The men incarcerated 2 months, and those incarcerated 11 months, showed increases in ‘D scores,' while the other groups showed decreases. or the 66 tPs computed, 12 were significant; eight of these involvedfithe 2 and 11 months groups,which differed from.the groups showing the greatest decreases in D scores, the 5 and 7 months groups. very small negative. changes were :manifested by’ the 1 and 3 months groups, and these 2 groups differed from the 5 and 6 months groups; The changes in depression scores do seem to have some relationship to months spent in prison. no significant changes were observable in men incarcerated l to 3 months, while in the next 7 months, significant change could be demonstrated in all but the 7 months group. no significant change 'was discernible in the 11 and 12 months groups. Since only the extremely changing and the extremely none changing groups differed from. each other, it would seem that the most conservative statement which could be made is that men remain approximately as depressed as they were in the ReceptionsDiagnostic Center for the first three {months in prison. Thereafter, for a while, they feel sig- nificantly less depressed. Toward the end of’the first year, they once again start to feel quite as depressed as they did when they first entered the prison. Figure 6 pre- sents these results graphically. “ . l u .' . 0 'n ‘- I. ‘ ., . fl ' r ' . . . ' .- . ‘ n |". | I '. .. I . I l . ' -‘ . r- ; -,. . , ‘ e. . I - . '.'..--' ' ‘ .' - i. . I "' r- «- .,"‘..'. .‘ . ' f,,.‘v._--._': .. . . .... : ‘.1’..‘. 'N - .. . .. . .. _ . . -'. '-:':- .'. ".n. \- . .‘ - . . , .41.; ' i \' ..." —. - ' . ~ , r :‘l l I 1.. 5 ~ , - l I ~ ..1. . ,_ ' - ' ,. ' . ‘- u . 4.. .... x 0 . -- ‘ . . .I' " '. . .'. '1 . ~' ' e”'_ J' . I .‘ ..- .. ". 7.1 . , c NJ. .3. .'_"c'. " J' J . .. - "' ' .. _ _ ‘ 5‘55. .1: 1.: .-._." '7 ’ '. .. 1‘ . .. . ". . ' -. d u' . . . . . .a - .. . .‘F r,‘ . - -- . it! _ .' - u .I‘, - .. "- a “la- ‘_ . ,. . . _ .. -. . . . . .. . . . . ...-Z“ I 1, . , . . . .. .--.._ u f ' - .n t' .. I.“ on ' "I l _. I . I -. :-' _' V - .- .l \w' U' '1 '. - ‘ ..- ‘k- . .\ . . n . . .. ‘ . .. . . \I . '- 0" (I ‘ . .. ~' .. u I. I . :n..|. ‘.. '. - . ,. . . l .. -. \ . u - v C ' ' I n '..a. o .. \: '.' )__-= ,1” - ':"" ' -.n. v .__’ :10 .19:- . .- .. ! .5, .-- v .I. .... . - .-‘-—-. :' " and; (- ”'5' Jo}— ' f l .- ... 2:253": 87 Months in Prison 1 2 3'1. '5"6'7”8"9'"1c 11 12 1.5o--E- . - ....... , .; _,0 ..... Mean Changes -2.00-5 ' in D Scores 4.50-4 : .............. Figure 6 MEAN CHANGES IN D SCORES FOR THE TWELVE STAGGERED MONTHLY EOUPS# #Significant changes are indicated by X, non-significant changes by 0. The Statistical Significance of Mean Changes In the Monthly Groups Having established that change significantly different from .zero occurred on 9 of the 13 scales of the MMPI and that on 2 scales the magnitude of the change varied among the 12 monthly groups, it seemed important to determine 88 whether these changes were significantly different from zero for each of the 12 monthly groups. On Table III, which presents the mean changes on each scale for eachof the monthly groups, significant changes are indicated by underlining. Generally speaking, the monthly changes did not at— tain significance, in part, no doubt, because the N's in each month were so small. However, it was generally the case that the monthly changes went in the direction of the total mean change. No single generalization can cover the relationship between significant changes and months spent in prison. It is not the case that all the significant changes are clustered in the first few months or the last few months, or something of this sort. For a. few of the variables, however, certain trends appear. ‘Ihe increases in K scores, which, it will be recalled, vary significantly among the 12 groups, are apparent from the very first month, and remain significant throughout the year except in the ease of the 7-months group where, however, there is also an increase rather than a decrease. In the case of the F scale, on the other hand, there is no significant change during the first 1.. months in prison; the significant de- creases which occur are clustered in the last 8 monthly groups . 89 is far the clinical scales, it will be recalled that the D scale first stayed at. the initial level, decreased during the middle of the year, and then.went back to the initial level. The Pt scale shows a comparable trend, though to a lesser degree. There is significant decrease in Pt scores after 2 months of insignificant increase, and then the Pt scores go back to their original level. The IMa scale manifests erratic, non-significant ups and downs for the first 11 months; for group 12, however, there is a significant decrease. Conceivably, this is the begins ning of a trend, though, of course, there are no further groups representing longer periods of incarceration in the present study. The Si pattern is again somewhat similar to the Pt pattern, with one exception in group 12: first, there is no change, and then comes a period of decreased Si scores; in the second half of the year, the Si scores are not different from.their initial level, with the exh ception of a decrease in.the lZ-months group. While no smooth curves can be plotted, the data in Table XII nonetheless are suggestive of the fellowing trend: "FOr the first 2 'months in prison, adjustment is comparable to that in the Reception-Diagnostic Center, except for increased L and K scores. Then seems to come a period of "settling down,” with some loss of depression but also, of social interest. Psychasthenia, too, de- creases, but at the end of the year, both the depression 90 and the psychasthenia scores are back to their original level. At the end of the year, too, Mh.and Si have de~ creased significantly. The initial L and K increases are maintained throughout (though in the case of the L scale, they are not always significant), while the significantly decreased F scores tend to be maintained after they emerge in the second third of the year. Test-Retest Reliability The MMPI is generally accepted as a reliable instru- ment. It seemed well worthwhile, however, to evaluate test-retest reliability for the present sample. The fact that change was anticipated and, as a.matter of fact, oc- curred, does not mean that the test-retest reliability must be low. Had everyone's score changed by the same amount, for example, there would be significant change and, also, perfect correlation between the initial and retest scores. Test-retest correlations were calculated for each scale for each month. Total correlations for the whole sample for each scale were also calculated. These results are presented in Table XIV. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ..nauz anon: A «genus meadow do now Hsz 633325 one need so ago.” an on» as 950.33»? whoapsfiomuoo \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ .mwacz ones: a- aaoowo nodes» fine so.“ m .72 me ‘l“‘11‘ [L 31333333333333. $3 is .31. mm” 8n 4%. a «on a a1: 84 So- 2.4 3.7 o3. he: a.” as at he a. a. 3 we. so as as as as he. a 2 3333333333333 3 2 3333333333333 2 . a as .3 3 .3 E a. as as as as a. s... s . 3333333333333 2 i flfimaoommmamgamfiaamflaa. 3 o as as. 3 so a... 3 d .3 s. as a a. 3 a . 3333333333333 3 . 3833333333333 2 . 33333S3333333 a N @1943 mm fl:mw.w.1w.wmzmmm. .Nmflfimmmmmaom Mmm:wlm.. ........ 2 ...... a améomiflfiemsannmuaa z sonata . a.“ 23:02 ........ seasoning |.ll. . L I \ n 3 ‘ . L P I I n 1131313 3 1“!“ illi‘lldnuhll‘l‘ $9505 Hanna’s: Gmmwoadam m>§ Ha. mom mmflfium Hg an. 20 mzogamms Bagsammfi. E -mflmfiw 92 'lhere is inevitably a relationship between the number of significant correlations in a given month and the number of cases in that month. 'lhus, groups 5 and 11, which have 11 and 10 men, respectively, yielded the smallest number of significant correlations. 0n the other hand, the group with the most men, the hpmonths group with an I of 22, did not have the largest number of significant correlations. mus, while the number of cases in a given monthly sample is a factor in determining the number of significant cor- relations obtained, it is by no means the only factor. The rank order correlation between N and the number of signif- icant correlations for the 12 groups is .652. As for the test-retest correlations, it should first and foremost be pointed out that they are hiwly signifi- cant for all of the scales. 'Ihe Si scale, with a test- retest correlation of .876, is clearly more reliable than the Pa scale, with its test-retest correlation of .398, but even the latter, which is the lowest of the obtained correlations, is significant at far beyond the 1% level. Of the total 156 correlations computed, 93 are significant at the 5% level or less. this clearly exceeds the chance expectation of 7 to 8 correlations significant at the 5% level. It also seems worthy of comment that, in general, the correlations which do not achieve significance are in the same direction as those which do; only rarely does a correlation close to zero or a negative correlation turn 93 up. 'lhe total correlations, while highly significant, are certainly not close to unity. ‘lhis would suggest that the significant scale changes which have been discussed above were not of a consistent magnitude throughout the sample. Rather, it would seem that some individuals changed in their 1., or D, or Pa scores more than other individuals did. 'lhis does not seem surprising, in view of the highly individualized reactions which are bound to occur to a strong stimulus such as the prison environment. It would therefore be anticipated that the test-retest correlations would be lower in this study than in a study concerned pri- marily with reliability, in which, of course, the examiner goes out of his way to assure as much as possible that there has been minimal change between test and retest; it would, in other words, be anticipated that the obtained test-retest correlations would be below the generally accepted reliability coefficients for the MMPI for all of the scales. This is taken up in detail in the Discussion Chapter. . Inspection of Table XIV leads to a consideration of the monthly differences among the correlation coefficients for any one given scale. 'lhese differences were analyzed by means of chi-square, and Table XV presents the results for the 13 MI scales. 9b TABLE XV DIFFERENCE AMONG THE TEST-RETEST CORRELATIONS .-. 0F THE TWELVE SThGGERED GROUPS. . A . Scale Chi-Square L 7.496 F 17.925 K .7.136 HS 21e * 3 13°33; y e Pd 1h.8h3 Mf 7.293 Pa. 18e206 Pt 19.619 So .800 Ma 2.517 Si 9.656 1 I I i l i 4 l 4 d l oooooooo There would be no reason to expect the variations among the correlations for any given scale to be anything but ran- dom, and as a matter of fact, only one of the chi-square out of the 13 calculated achieved statistical significance. This might be considered one of those "significant” results that do happen by chance 1 in 20 times. However, 5 other chi- squares are quite close to significance at; with 11 degrees of freedom, a chi-square of 19.675 is significant at the 5% level. It seemed worthwhile to look into the 4 scales inp valved, the F, the He, the Pa, and the Pt, a little more in detail. Because of the rather high rank order correlation between 95 the number 'of cases in.a given.month and the number of significant correlations which obtained in that month, it seemed worthwhile to calculate for these i scales rank order correlations between.the number of cases in a given month and the size of the correlations obtained. However, none of these correlations is in any way impressive. For Be, it is .18; for F, it is .033; for Pa, it is .2A; and for Pt, it is .033.' The number of cases in each month, then, seems to have little, if any, bearing on the size of the correlation coefficient for that month. Just what significance to attach to the obtained sige nificant and near significant chi-squares does not seem clear. All that can be said is that for A scales, the test-retest correlations tend to vary among the months. However, months which on one of these scales have high test- retest correlations are not necessarily the same ones with high correlations on the other scales. Inter-Scale Correlations Correlations were also obtained on both the initial test and the retest between each scale and every other one. In Tables XVI-A and XVI-B are presented the inter-scale cor- relations for the two testings. 96 com.n 0mm.. man. can. one. hao.u H50. «mm. Ham. mw~.n «m4. mac. am eon.u men. «an. baa. end. mad. one. aa~.- asa.u mem.u sum. mom.. a: as - ; . 0mm. mom. 4mm. nan. mom. «me. men. men. man. 000. 5mm. umo.u om ** ** : mas. mad. emu. «he. 4mm. 5mm. was. amm. mac. mbo.n mus. moo.u pm ** ** - 0mm. baa. adm. was. Adm. cam. mum. mom. mam. ood.n mus. Hmo.n mm ** cs as - - one. end. mom. emu. Adm. and. How. Hmo. moo. HHH.I mud. mma.n .3; . - ** ** ** sao.u mud. «me. and. cam. 44H. can. cam. mam. new. Hem. moo. em ** ** ** * - awe. one. was. man. mum. How. can. Ham. amp. mom. and. «ma. hm ** ** ** ** ** Nam. mam.n mom. 4mm. mom. Hmo. cum. Ham. one. mud.u mos. see. a ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ; L Ham. mbH.u man. man. omu. mac. mom. amp. one. chm. mum. mam. mm ** * ** **L ** ** ** ** mm~.- mem.u moo. mao.- oea.u aaa.- new. mom. maa.u cam. oom.u so“. a ** ** * ** ** * ** «m4. 5mm. 5mm. mus. mm:. and. How. «ma. non. mum. mem.n mac. m ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** *fi ** . «so. omm.- smo.u meo.- Hmo.u mma.- moo. «ma. see. own. son. was. a ** . * ** ** _ am as on E . em. «a -E _ Hm . a a: a. a a mmnaom .Hazz mngm A4909 mun. 5% 9mm“. AdHBHZH "$3.. 20 wZOHedqmmmoo wagon I EZH 41H: was 97 a3... ads. awn. now. moo. sea. oaa. a3. oom. wee... «.3. «no... as Mean... sou. oao. Re. 98. 3a. oaa. «ea... mao. 2a.... is. 3a... a: anm. son. has. has. mea. mos. ama. asm. one. saa. «as. ema. no new new asm. oao.n 5mm. mam. ooa. maa. was. «on. nae. oao. New. omo.n on an. new mom. RN. s3. Rm. Rm. 13a. 34. com. aom. So... mom. moo. so an. saw so." an. . moo. omo.- «ea. ooe. emu. “ma. mam. mam. sea. oso.n mac. who.u as a. an." new .eoa. sea. mos. maa. soa. «ma. «we. mmo. amm. mam. oea. son. on * saw "was oaa. oaa. a3. mas. 5.3. one. «me. man. i.n. mom... oam. moo. an new new .1. new new ass. ~aa.- aha. mom. son. mam. «mo. men. can. mom.n maa. oma. o new ... as. new new new new owe. mao. one. oae. aom. ama. amu. ass. owe. mom. «on. «mm. mm as... . sow new new new new new one... «S... saa. oao. moo... 98... man. mom... «3... «we. mam... lawn. a new ... new new new new . «as. .eso. «es. mom. mom. moo. sea. cam. oaa. mom. mo~.: mao.n .m as." new new *3. * new new 8.. «no? sea... lama. «no... moo. «no... sea... moo. oma. «mm. eon. mao... a a yum . as . . vary as as em ..E as as em as o as a a a mason Hogs mag». .32 a; aoa Seems a; so ozoaafimmmoo maaom . saga mug mamas 98 0n.the initial test,56 of the 78 correlations were sig- nificant, while on.the retest, 54 were significant. Gena orally, the correlations 'significant initially remained significant on the retest, while those not significant initially remained nonpsignificant. Initially, the L and K scales were highly intercorre- lated, as were the Hs,Hy, and Pt. scales. Pt also correlated highly with Sc and D. The Pd scale correlated most high- 1y with Pt, F and St. The Pa scale correlated most highly with Sc, while 31 correlated.most highly with D. Generally speaking, the Mh.sca1e showed the lowest intercorrelations with the other scales; it correlated most highly with Sc and K. . Changes in Inter-Scale Correlations While the same general intercorrelations recurred on the retest, certain changes have obviously taken place, as Table XVI-A. and XVI-B make clear. The difference between. any two correlations,such as that between the L and.K scales on the first test and the L and K scales on the retest was analyzed statistically. The 2' transformation was used, in a method described by Edwards (7). 0f the 78 correlations, 12 had changed significantly. Correlations which went up were L-Pd, K-Si, K-D, D-Hy, and D-Pa. Correlations which went down significantly were F-D, r-Pt, F-Sc, K-Hy, Hs-Pt, Pd-Pt, and Sc-Pt. Thus, while- 99 the initial correlation between L and Pd was almost zero, it was highly significant on the retest. 0r again, while the initial correlation between F and D was significant, upon retesting it no longer was. The same is true for the correlation between Pd and Pt. The remaining correlations which changed between the tests ‘were significant on both tests, but more so on one occasion than the other. Quantitative Configurational Analysis Over and over again, psychometric tests of personality have been criticized for their "atomistic" approach and fer their ignoring of the ”total gestalt" £17). The truth in this criticism has beenhrecognized to the point where "profile analysis" is considered to be one of the most important approaches to the MMPI. welsh has offered two measures which, while ending up with "yet another number,“ depend on several of the MMPI scores in the profile; these are the anxiety index and the internalization ration (17). Both of these measures were used in the present study.' The Anxiety Index The anxiety index is defined by the following formula, which uses TBScores rather than raw scores: (fléfgigl) / ((D/Pt)-(Hs/Hy). An anxiety index was calculated for each man, and the figures thus obtained ‘were analyzed in the same manner as the scores on the individual scales were. Thble XVII presents the data fer the anxiety index. 100) TABLE XVII ANXIETY INDEX DATA: INITIAL TEST MEANS RETEST ms, MEAN csmcss TEST-RETEST CORRELATIONS , AND ANALYSES or VARIANCE sci THE INITIAL TEST, THE RETEST AND THE was” —— - t ’ H L—_‘ F... —w‘~— —— v—— V Months i Initial Test Retest Mean ‘ Test-Retest Prison N j Mean Mean W t. Correlation t if. 323 3'33? '33 " 3* 3 19 79.16 77.68 -I;h7 - .56* A 22 77.95 76.591 4305 e " .6?“ 5 11 80.09 67.27 -12.82 2.85# .37 6 16 80.13 69.13 -11.00 2.40* .32 3 15 79.13 7h.73 - 5&0 - “.A6 17 8.59 72.47 - .12 - .55” 9 15 0.60 75.1.? -5.-',00 - .70“ 10 11. 77.133 76.29 4.111. - .78“ 11 10 68.30 70.00 1.70 - -.z2 Total 185 76.51 73.45 -3.06 2.50:: new A L; v fw— Analysis ongariance 1 Initial Test spurge of Variation df ‘ Meg-1" s9. ‘ nae .1? Between - 51.8217“) 11 1.98.431 1.311. Within 65641. 500 133 379 . 1.31 Total 71134.2“) 1 lo ' g . Analysis of Variance - Retpst _‘ Between ' 2904.3 990 11 26h§090 1.093 Within 1.179lé780 17 241.571 Total ##696.770 182 , m ‘12. sis of Vgiance - Change chgeg _ _ . Between 3875.981 11 ‘ 352.362 1.289 Within 1.7305365 173 273.M1 Total 51181.346 18!. “—- _ _ - ... f T-Scores rather than raw scores were used. xkrwIm - w-e—el—o—e—eh-e—r-__ fivx—r u-w 101 'The mean anxiety index on the initial test was 76.51, while that on the retest was 73.h5. The mean decrease for the total sample was -3.06, which is significant at less than the 5%ilevel of confidence. For only two monthly groups is the change significantly different from.zero, for men incarcerated five months and six months; both earlier and later in the year the changes which occur are not significantly different from, zero. Thus, it would seem that initially, anxiety stays at the level it had when a man first entered the prison; in the middle of the year, it decreases significantly, but thereafter returns to its initial level. The reliability of the anxiety index is in line with that for the individual scales. The overall test-retest correlation is highly significant, and seven of the month- ly correlations are significant at the 5% level or less. The one negative correlation which occurs is not signifi- cantly different from zero. Analysis of variance Shows that the initial means as well as the retest means do not vary among the twelve month- ly groups more than would be eXpected on the basis of chance. The same is true for the change scores. Just how anxious is this group of men? The anxiety indethas been so defined as to yield an expected value of 102 ‘50 ferns normal record. With standard errors of 1.hh and 1.14, respectively, the means obtained on the first test and on the retest ‘were significantly different from 50 at less than the 1% level of confidence. The Internalization Ratio The internalization ratio is defined as follows, again using T-Scores: Hy D Pta. In Table XVIII are presented the data for the internalization ratio. . The initial mean internalization ratio (IR) was .98. With a standard error of .011, this is not significantly different from a ”normal" 1.00 (z=l.55) The IR decreased significantly, the retest IR being .95. ‘With a.standard error of .009, this differs at less than the 1%11evel from 1.00. As analysis of variance shows, the initial IR's and the retest IR's did not differ among the monthly groups. The analysis .of variance for the IR changes, however yielded a significant F. Bartlett's test for homogeneity of variance was performed; a chi-square of 19.533 is close to the 19.675 required for significance at the 5% level of confidence for 11 degrees of freedom, which suggest that the variances among the 12 groups vary from. each other 103 TABLE XVIII INTHINALIZATION RATIO DATA: INITIAL TEST MEANS, RETEST MEANS, MEAN CHANGES, TEST.EETEST CORRELA- TIONS, AND ANALYSES 0F VARIANCE FOR THE INITIAL . TEST, THE RETEST, AND THE CHANGES#. . . - A_~-—‘ _.A A AA AAAl Months in Initial Retest R31? Test-2 Prison N Mean Mean Mean Change t Corrections ,..1....18 ...... ‘9 ...... ;95.... -.62 ....... ;.... . .** ..... 2 e 9 e 99 f e "' e 8 w 3 19 099 e97 -.02 ' 973** k 22 e03 e98 “e05 ' e52* 5 11 e99 e89 “e10 2e67* 955 6 16 1.01. e95 “e09 3.09“ 068“ Z 15 egg e9 ‘eOB ’ e85** 17 e .9 e 00 " o 83" 9 15 .99 .97 -.02 - .79** 10 11. 1.03 .95 -.08 1.98 .17 11 10 .89 .91. {.04 - .58 12 .1t .129 .82 ~21. .......- .19“ I _ _ - h _ A...___— “_.-_._.- r l b I l I 7 Total 185 .98 .95 -.03 a it. 11‘ . . , 4 . n - p - n p n a a a . g . . ’9 ------ Source of Variation df Mean Square 1“ Between 0.320 110.02909 1.381 Within 3. 693 173 0.02134 Total 4.013 184 Analysis 9f Vggiagce-Retegt Between 0.162 11 ' ' 0. 011.72 1.065 Within 2.391 133 0.01382 Total 2.553 1+ sis Varian e-Ch S 0 Between 0.289 ' '11- llll 0.02630 I ' 2.007* Within 2.262 1 3 0.01307 Total 2e551 1 h *A—A—‘_ ---m-t- — lllllllllllllllllllll # T-scores rather than raw scores were used. .............................. 104 more than would be expected if they were random samples from.a common population. Comparisons were then made be- tween each group and every other group, and of the 66 t's calculated, 13 achieved significance. The only IR changes significantly different from.zero occurred in the 5 and 6 months groups; the decrease in the 10 month group ap- proached significance at the 7% level. Almost all of the significant t's involved these three groups, which dif- fered from. those showing small non-significant increaseS' or decreases in IR. In general, then, it may be said that the men in the sample showed less internalization after incarceration, and once again, most of the change was con- centrated in the middle of the year. The reliability of the internalization ratio is com- parable to that of single scales. The overall test-retest reliability is highly significant, and all twelve monthly correlations are positive; three, however, do not achieve significance. Abnormal and Normal Profiles Meehl conducted a study involving blind diagnosis with 105 the MMPI in which criteria for abnormality of profile were developed (13). Profiles were called abnormal under the following four conditions: 1. Any of the eight components showed T equal to or greater than 90. 2. Any of the eight components Showed T equal to or greater than 80, un- less K was less than 40. 3. Any of the eight comp Eonents showed T equal to or greater than 70, unless was less than 50 and L less than 60. A. Any of the eight components showed T equal to or greater than 65, unless K was less than 65 and L less than 60 (13:518). The above criteria were used in the present study, applying the analysis, however, to all ten clinical scales rather than just eight. Table XIX shows the number and per cent of abnormal profiles in each month and in the sample as a whole on both the initial test and the retest; it also shows the change between testings. The data belOW' suggest that, in general, more than half of the men had abnormal profiles, and in fact, even the 62% abnormal profiles on the initial test is signifi- cantly different from 50%, which would have been expected by chance (2 is 3.33, and the probability is less than .01). Furthermore, the pr0portion of abnormal profiles on the retest was significantly greater than the proportion on test one (2 is 2.2h, and the probability is less than .05). 106 TABLE 211 NUMBER AND PER CENT 0T“ARN0RNAL MMPI PROFILES on THE INITIAL TEST AND 0N THE RETEST FOR THE TWELVE . . STAGGEiER (mom’s . oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Initial Test Retest Mbnths in Prison N Abnormal % Abnormal 1 f Increase 1 18 9 50 12 67 17 2 11'. ’ 3 '58 10' 72 111’» 3 19 12 53 1'3 71. 11 ‘5‘ if 12 Z? 19 3% 23 6 16 12 5 1'1 69 -6 7 15 12 0 13 87 7 8 17 11 65 11 6'5 ' O 9 15 8 53 10 67 11 IO 11. 10 71 8 5‘7 ~11. 11 1'0 1. 1.0 6 60 20 12 11. 5 36 9 61. 28 Total 185 111. 62 131 71 9 TABLE 3 DISTRIBUTION OF NORMAL AND ABNORMAL MMPI PROFILES ON 'H-IE INITIAL TEST AND CHINE RETEST Retest N Abnormal .... Total A rmal Initial b” 2° 9" 11.4 Test Normal 31. 37 71 Total 54 131 18 5 107 In an attempt to relate the percentage of abnormal profiles in each month to the length of time those men have been incarcerated, rank order correlations were done between these two variables. For the first test, this correlation is .24, suggesting a slight and non~signifi- cant degree of relationship. The comparable correlation on the retest yielded a phi of .62. This may be considered a reasonably strong relationship suggesting;that the longer the men were in.prison, the 1223; the percentage of abnormp a1 profiles. The correlation. between the percentage of abnormal profiles on the first test and on the retest is .59; that is, the fewer abnormal profiles a given.month contained the first time, the fewer there 'were the second time o The relationship between.months spent in prison and percentage of abnormal profiles is striking. In an attempt to clarify this relationship, these two variables were plotted against each other, and figure 7 presents the data for both testings. 108 Months in Prison 1 2 _3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 fire-9’1"”- - J v ...—n...“ Per cent of ” Abnormal Profiles 1:0 Initial Test 30 : Retest _______ ‘ F- ............................. FIGURE 7 PERCENTAGE OF ABNORMAL MMPI PROFILES ON THE INITIAL TEST AND ON THE RETEST FOR THE TWELVE STAGGERED GROUPS The above diagram suggests that the relationship on the retest between these two variables is more nearly curvilinear than rectilinear; that is, at the beginning and at the end of the year there were fewer abnormal pro- files than in.the middle of the year. If some measure of degree of abnormality for each man were available, it would be possible to calculate eta; however, the present measures do not seem to warrant such calculation. Both Table XIX and Figure 7 show that for most of the months, the percentage of abnormal profiles increases. The question arises as to the relationship between the size of 109 this increase and months spent in prison. The rank order correlation between these two variables is -.06, which seems to indicate that there is no relationship between months in prison and size of increase in percentage of abnormal profiles. Rank order correlation was also calculated between age and increase in percentage of abnormal profiles. This correlation is -.43, suggesting some trend such that the older the men are in.a given month the less increase there is in the percentage of abnormal profiles. It seems ques- tionable, however, whether this correlation can be consid- ered of statistical significance. Correlations were also done between age and percentage of abnormal profiles for both testings. Neither of these correlations is very high; fer the initial test it is .175, for the retest -.157. The most important findings in this analysis of abnor- mal profiles would seem to be that significantly more than half of the profiles ‘were abnormal on both the initial test and retest, and that more men presented abnormal pro- files on the second occasion. There is no relationship between the percentage of abnormal profiles and monthly group initially, but there is a relationship on the retest such that the longer the men are in prison, the fewer the abnormal profiles. The plotted curve suggests that these 110‘- two variables are related in a curvilinear rather than a rectilinear fashion. Supplement ary Data Because of the differences in age which were found to exist among the twelve monthly groups, it seemed profitable to try to analyze whether the results presented in this chapter would gain in meaning or clarity if the age variable were taken into consideration. Because of the recognized correlation between the depression scale and age (17), the D scale was taken as a sample study. Correlations were calculated between initial D scores and age, retest D scores and age, and change scores on the D scale and age. These correlations were calculated for each month as well as for the sample as a whole. Table XXI presents this data. TABLE XXI CORRELATION BETWEEN AGE AND INITIAL MMPI DEPRESSION SCORE RETEST DEPRESSION SCORE, AND DEPRESSION SCORE CHANGE """""""""""" Correlations 'between. Months in Prisog “N _ Age: Initial Test Age :eRete .313 Age: 0ha_gge . l. . 18 . -.08 ..... ..35 ........ _.21 2 1h .32 018 “003 3 19 021 022 -007 1+ 22 .09 .31 .1 5 11 .64* .20 -.6 a: 6 16 . 57* . 55* - .12 7 15 -th 935 02 8 17 .22 90h '01 9 15 .25 .40 .08 10 14 .25 012 '01“ 11 10 -.29 -.33 -.ll& 12 1# “0&2 033 021 ................................................. 111 It can'be seen that on. both testings the correlation between D and age is significant. 0n the first test, most of the monthly correlations do not achieve significance, and although the retest correlation is significant at less than the 1%Aleve1, this is true also of the retest correla- tions. The correlation between change in D scores and age is not significant, and in only one month does this corre- lation achieve significance at even the Sfiilevel of confidence. Clearly, then, the age variable has not influenced the data presented earlier. It will be recalled that analysis of variance indicated that the D scores did not vary sig- nificantly from month to month on either the initial test or the retest, but that the change scores'AAA vary Significant- 1y among the months; yet age is correlated significantly with both initial and final D scores and not significantly with the change scores. . Furthermore, when test and retest D scores were plotted against months in prison, no smoothing of curves was mane aged by eliminating the "oldest" and "youngest" months,or even the two "oldest” and the two "youngest" months. There seems to be no evidence whatever, then, that the differences in age demonstrated to exist among the months influenced the results presented earlier. The D scale was expected to be particularly sensitive to such influence because of its 112 correlation with age, and consequently this line of analy- sis was abandoned as fruitless. CHAPTER V' DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS The previous chapter presented the results; it is the purpose of this chapter to integrate the more significant findings and to discuss their implications. Initial Test Findings The mean group profile obtained for all 185 cases on the initial test is characterized by elevated Pd and D Scales. Strong psychopathic tendencies are in evidence, coupled with depressive features and some elevation on the other two components of the neurotic triad.(Hy and H8). The pattern in general is that of a conduct disorder but ‘with a slightly lowered Ma score, suggesting less propen- sity to ”acting out" behavior. “N « These results seem to reflect a shock reaction to imprisonment. Personal experience, as well as the comments of numerous prison officers and officials, has indicated that frequently, it is not until the newly arrived inmate starts on the initial processing (like inoculations and testing) that he recognizes the full implications of his predicament. The new inmate generally recognizes at this time that the prison will be his new’ home, that his 114 freedom is going to be curtailed, and that he is going to be kept under the dictates of other people, with little opportunity to do things other than he is told. Under these circumstances, it is understandable that the psycho- pathic profile is slightly different from. its usual form, where the Ma scale is generally the second peak, and the D scale is relatively low. Comparison of Study Sample and Random.Prison Sample It has been demonstrated that the initial test find- ings for the study sample differed significantly on sever- al scales from the random sample of the prison population. The question arises: which sample is typical of prison populations in general? There are other studies utilizing the MMPI which have been conducted on prison populations in other states. The most relevant study is one conducted by Robert Smith (16). He administered the MMPI to groups of prisoners at the “Minnesota State Prison, the Minnesota State Reformatory, the .maryland State Penitentiary, and several other penal institutions in the United States. When one compares the mean profiles of the Minnesota State Pris- on and the Minnesota State Reformatory 'with the random Jackson sample, one finds striking.similarity. However, inspection of the profiles does reveal some differences, particularly on the Pd, Na, D, and F scales. The Minnesota 115 men tend to score slightly lower on these scales, and high- er on the L scale. Comparing the mean.Mfinnesota groups! profile with the mean initial profile on the study sampl; also reveals difference on the Pd scale, which is elevated for the Minnesota groups. No statistical comparisons were made among these groups, as it was not felt that this would be a fruitful venture. One important factor which speaks against further analyses is the fact that the Jackson samples were newly admitted, or newly re-admitted to prison, whereas the ' Mhnnesota groups were men who had been confined for varied periods of time. Accordingly, one would expect to find differences, since the present study has demonstrated differences between profiles obtained upon first contact with the prison environment and those obtained after con- finement. However, the Pd scale bears special mention. The mean Pd score for the Minnesota groups falls approxi- mately' midway between the initial study sample score and that of the random sample. It will be recalled that the Pd scale showed no significant change between the initial and the second testing, so that the above mentioned dif- ference between the Jackson samples and the Minnesota groups need perhaps not be taken into account for this scale. It would appear that the random sample of the Jackson population is more strongly psychopathic than the 116 sample of the Minnesota populations which Smith studied, but that the first offender is less psychopathic than either. Test-Retest Reliability The test-retest correlations presented in the results chapter seem on the whole to be lower than those presented in the testing manual (10). However, when one compares the pres- ent correlations with those obtained by Gough (9). one finds that his are even lower. Gough's 34 military prisoners were subjected to a therapeutic program over a three-month period of time, and therefore, in addition to experiencing confine- ment, these men were undergoing treatment meant to bring about changes in personality adjustment. Accordingly, one would expect to find relatively low correlations, if the treatment program is effective. It is difficult to make sense out of such comparisons, since these studies vary in two ways: populations used, and aim. Perhaps, in general, college students give more "reli- able" results than do others; perhaps they experience a need to be "consistent."’ Psychiatric patients produce strikingly high test-retest correlations (1,0) which is of course a favorable commentary on the MMPI. Studies also differ in their aims. A researcher whose aim it is to assess a test's reliability, studies his popu- lation under as nearly identical conditions as possible. 117 Such was not the aim of the Gough study, nor of the pre- sent one. Gough introduced therapy between testing, while the present study focussed on incarceration. One would therefore expect lower test-retest correlations in these studies. Changes in the MMPI Scores This study was conducted for two main purposes. The first purpose was to discover what changes, if any, take place in men during their imprisonment, as these are re- flected on the.MMPI. The second purpose of the study was to determine at what time interval changes occurred. Retest findings have indicated that changes have in- deed occurred on the MMPI scores. Two prominent changes are the increase in elevation on the retest on the K scale and the marked decrease in elevation on the 0 scale. Come parative analysis of the initial and the retest D scores indicates that the change noted does not occur in the same direction or magnitude for all 12 months, but rather, that depression is kept elevated for several months, then de- creases for several months, and then starts rising again, so that by the last few months, it has attained the level it had during the first few months in prison. This pattern of change suggest that it takes the men several months to accept their incarceration; when they do, the feelings of 118 depression lessen, only to rise again.when the general routine of the prison becomes upsetting and involves con- siderable frustration. The increased K suggest a.more defensive attitude, which might be attributed to a rise in feelings of inade- quacy, and general concern about well-being; it may also reflect a desire to show "improvement? to prison officials, in order to receive favorable consideTation when parole is being contemplated. This line of reasoning is in part sup- ported by the increase in the elevation of the L scale on the retest, which is frequently interpreted as a desire to present a favorable picture. Changes in scores between the two testings are inter- esting and striking, but also of interest are scales that do not change significantly. This is true of the Pd scale, which is the most elevated both on the initial test and on the retest. This result is particularly noteworthy when one considers that this scale has been frequently re- ferred to as the main differentiating scale between people who commit antisocial acts and those who tend to live with- in the law. The lack “of significant change in the Pd scores suggests that, at least for the period of time stud- ied, the prison environment has not altered any tendencies of a psychopathically deviant nature. This finding is 119 especially important when one considers that the rehabili- tation programs found at the institution are geared to making the men less antisocial; the findings suggest that this particular end is not being met. It is conceivable that the time interval for this study, namely one year, is insufficient, and perhaps it requires several years of ex- posure to the rehabilitation program before significant changes will be registered on the Pd scale; on the other hand, association with.markedly psychopathic personalities may counterbalance any undesirable effect of the rehabili- tation programs on the first offender. Observed Changes on MMPI as a Function of Length of Incarceration The next question which arises is whether these changes occur at any particular time after the date of in- carceration. Is there more change after three months of incarceration than after six months, or is the time vari- able irrelevant? A thorough analysis of the changes that took place between the two testings indicates that no single general- ization can be made about these changes. No particular pattern has been established on the basis of which one can say with reasonable certainty that after three months or six months of incarceration the men can be expected to be 120 more depressed or less depressed, and so on. The data do suggest certain trends for some of the scales, and these are recorded in the results chapter. During the first few months in prison, there seems to be relatively little change except for the increase in L and K scores; this is suggestive of a desire to please, and to make a favorable impression. Following the first few months, men seem. to settle down. Perhaps they have started to become accustomed to the prison routine; they have probably started to work on some job assignment, or perhaps are attending one of the schools; they have had an opportunity to familiarize theme selves with the institution and some of its policies. When the men have been incarcerated.almost a year, there seems to be a return to the initial feelings of depression; time seems to be getting heavy on their hands, and there is ample opportunity for considerable ruminations about the past and the future. Nelsh's anxiety index has indicated that for the sample as a whole, there is a significant decrease in anxiety. JMonth by month analysis shows that this decrease is significant only for those men who have been in prison for five and six months. This trend in the changes in anxiety may be related to that noted on the depression scale and also the 121 psychasthenia scale, where it was noted that there was no change at first, a decrease in the middle months, and a re- turn to the initial level at the end of the year. These finding again tend to suggest that the men are initially upset at their incarceration, adapt after several months to their new environment, and then, again start becoming upset. Whlsh's internalization ratio has yielded results which would also seem to bear a relationship to this trend. There were no significant changes during the early' months of imprisonment, but significant decreases occurred during the 5th and 6th months, which is approximately the time when depression and anxiety went down. The decrease in in- ternalization may be interpreted as a greater tendency toward acting-out behavior. Like depression and anxiety, internalization goes back to its initial level near the end of one year of imprisonment. One added aspect of this trend would seem to be the significant decrease in the.Ma scale during the latter part of the year. These findings tend to be inter-related and to support one another, and may well be related to prison life. The initial period of incarceration, particularly in the Reception-Diagnostic Center, places rather severe re- strictions on the men, and they are likely to feel upset 122 and somewhat depressed at their predicament. Once they move out of the Reception-Diagnostic Center, they are granted more freedom. of movement and are conflronted with fewer restrictions; this undoubtedly helps to relieve them. of some of the pressures of confinement. 'Nith the passing of time, the men realize what it means to continue to re- main confined for quite some time, and this, coupled with a lack of complete freedom. of impulsive action without fear of almost immediate reprisal, brings them back to their initial level of disturbance. It should be pointed out that in the case of all of the trends discussed, it is not always the same monthly groups involved. Thus, it is not always the eight-months group which is "high" or "low." This would seem to add greater probability to the trends. Had some one or two groups consistently been "different" from the rest, one would have suspected that the monthly differences in age or minimum sentence were responsible. As it is, the trends discussed do App appear to depend on a particular monthly group; rather, the "beginning," the “middle,"~and the "end" of the year appear to present unique patterns of adjustment. It should also be pointed out that with all of the trends discussed, no other variable but the number of months spent in prison was taken into consideration. Since 123 many other variables undoubtedly enter into the initial and 'final MMPI scores, it seems likely that clearer results would have been obtained if the experimental design had been more complete. Thus, if all tables had been based, for example, on a ”Months Imprisoned by Age by Intelligence by Socio-Economic Level" design, much added insight would undoubtedly have been achieved. Personality change under any circumstances is, after all, a highly individualized matter, and group data often obscures individual data. In the present study, unfortunately, the obviously needed com- plexity could not be achieved, since the total number of cases was so small that many cells in any complex factor- ial design would have remained empty. Future studies conducted on a large scale, should be able to overcome this difficulty, at least in part, by incorporating more and more important variables. Research conducted on a larger scale would have anoth- er important asset: it could trace the trends discussed over longer periods of time. Are the men who Show greater acting-out tendencies after some months in prison the ones who ultimately become the hardened criminals? Does the Pd scale ultimately show a decrease or an increase? How would those inmates who show typically psychopathic records on both the initial and final testing compare over a period of years with those whose profiles Show few, if any, signs 124, of psychopathy? Such important questions can only be an- swered by future research. Since so much analyzed data is available for this sample of 185 first prison offenders, it might prove fruitful to extend the current study into a longitudinal one. The important point to be made, however, is that this initial research project has only scratched the surface, and raised at least as many questions as it has answered. Summary of the Discussion A review and discussion of the test results has indi- cated that changes in personality adjustment in prison inmates has taken place; the significance of these changes and the trends that seemed to develop have also been dis- cussed. On the basis of the present test findings, one can only speculate on trends beyond a year of imprisonment, and accordingly, one can only suggest that research in this area be continued over an extended period of time, and with more penetrating experimental design and data analysis. CHAPTER VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The Problem The purpose of this study was to investigate what changes in the IMMPI profiles took place in first prison offenders during their first year of imprisonment. A secondary problem was to determine at what time interval during this first year changes occurred. JMethodology and Procedure The sample for the study was composed of 185 first prison offenders admitted to the State Prison of Southern Michigan between February 1, 1956 and January 31, 1957. This sample of 185 was composed of 12 sub-groups, each group containing the men who had been admitted to prison during one month of the year, and who qualified for inclu- sion in the sample population. The number of men in the - sub-groups varied between 10 and 22. During the first week after their admission to the institution, the men took the group (booklet) form of the .MMPI. During the last week in February, 1957, the same test was re-administered. Since the sub-groups had been 126 admitted to the prison during different months, each sub- group represented a varying length of incarceration experience at the time of retesting. Aside from the two sets of MMPI scores, the following information was also obtained on each man: age, race, 1.0. score, minimum. sentence, maximum sentence, average grade reading level, and crime for which sentenced. The Findings The analysis of the MMPI data revealed the following: ,A. Initial test findings: a. In the mean profile for the total sample, the Pd and D scales were elevated more than any other scales. b. Comparison of initial test findings for the study sample with those for a random sample of prison inmates revealed differences significant at less than the 1% level on the Hs and Pd scales. The Pd scale was slightly higher for the random sample, while the Hs scale was significantly higher for the study sample. The Study sample also scored higher on the L and K scales (7% level) and lower on the Ma scale (6% level). 0. Analysis of variance for the 12 sub-groups for each of the 13 scales of the MMPI indicated that the 127 12 sub-groups are comparable. ,g. Retest findings: a. Analysis of variance for the 12 sub-groups for each of the 13 scales of the MMPI revealed that MT scores varied significantly (between the 5% and 1% levels) among the 12 sub-groups. b. Significant variation among the sub-groups also occurred on the Si scale, at between the 5% and 1% levels of confidence. c. Comparison of initial test and retest means revealed statistically significant decreases at less than the 1% level of confidence on these scales: D, F, Mf, Pa, Na, and Si. The Pt mean also went down on the retest, a result significant at the 5% level, while the L and K scales increased at the 1% level of con- fidence. The decrease on. the Sc and Hs scales were significant at the 7% and 6% levels respectively, while the changes on the Pd and Hy scales didn't even approach significance. d. Analysis of variance for the change scores (retest minus initial score) indicated significant variation among the 12 sub-groups on the K scale (1% level) and the D scale (between the 5% and 1% levels). 2. Test-Retest Reliability: a. Test-retest correlations on the 12 sub-groups 128 for each of the 13 scales were computed. Ninety-three of the 156 correlations were found to be significant at the 5% level or less. b. Test-retest correlations for the total sample were also calculated; these were significant at far beyond the 1% level for all 13 scales. '5. Inter-scale correlations: a. Correlations were also obtained on both the initial test and the retest between each scale and every other one. Fifty-six of the 78 correlations were significant on the initial test, while 54 of the 78 correlations were significant on the retest. b. Generally, the same pattern of inter-correla- tion existed on both the initial and the second testings. 5, The anxiety index: Welsh's anxiety index was calculated for each man. The mean anxiety index on the initial test was 76.51, while that on the retest was 73.A5. The mean decrease for the total sample was -3.06, which is significant at less than the 5% level of confidence. Both the initial and the retest means were significantly differ- ent from a "normal" 50 (1% level). 6. The internalization ratio: Welsh's internalization ratio was calculated for 129 each man. The mean internalization ratio on the initial test was .98; with a standard error of .011, this is not statistically different from a "normal" 1.00. The retest internalization ratio is .95; with a standard error of .009, this differs from a "normal" 1.00 at less than the 1% level of confidence. The decrease in internalization ratio between testings is significant at less than the 1% level of confidence. 1. Abnormal and normal MMPI profiles: . The criteria developed by lMeehl categorizing profiles as normal and abnormal were applied to both the initial and retest findings. 0n the initial test, 62% of the men registered abnormal profiles; on the retest, 71% of the men had abnormal profiles. This is an increase of 9%, which is Significant at between the 5% and 1% levels of confidence. Conclusions The outcomes of this research appear to justify the following conclusions, subject to the limitations of the study. 1. Changes in the personality adjustment of inmates during their first year or less of imprisonment are indi- cated by changes in the MMPI profiles. This conclusion supports the contention of many penologists that the prison 130 environment encourages changes in personality adjustment. Furthermore, this finding is of considerable importance to prison personnel active in the rehabilitation program. Prison personnel cognizant of these changes in personality adjustment in the inmates can gear their rehabilitation programs to take them into account. 2. Discernible trends indicating phases of the personality adjustment process during the first year of imprisonment were suggested but inconclusive. The type of change and sequence of change were noted. Such trends if supported by more extensive research, can be of consider- able practical value to the counselors of the institution, who are actively engaged. in counseling the inmates for rehabilitation purposes. 3. .More prison inmates had abnormal MMPI profiles following a period of incarceration than on admission to the institution. This is supportive of the views of many penologists that imprisonment leads to increased mental disturbance in prisoners. This finding is suggestive of the need for improvement in our penal rehabilitation programs. 4. First prison offenders, as a group, appear to be less psychopathic than a random sample of prison inmates. This finding leads to the implication that perhaps first offenders, as a group, are more salvable and more capable 131 of changing to socially acceptable behavior than individuals who have experienced incarceration on several previous occasions. Perhaps more effort toward rehabilitation should be directed at this group; possibly, such reorien- tation would yield results in the form of a reduced recidivism rate. Implications For Further Research This investigation has raised a number of questions which are beyond the scope of this study. Certain conclu- sions were reached in terms of the data of this study; however, they constitute a small beginning into the con- trolled study of the effects of imprisonment on personality adjustment. The following are a few of the more important implications for future study: 1. A.longitudinal research project involving person- ality assessment prior to imprisonment, at the time of admission to prison, during confinement, and finally, after release from prison, would appear to be a fruitful project. A study of this nature might well be conducted under vary- ing conditions in different prison systems in an effort to delineate the type of penal environment most apt to foster desirable changes in personality adjustment. 2. Analysis of personality adjustment changes during incarceration as a function of type of criminal offense 132 (murders, sex offenses, armed and unarmed robbery, car theft, etc.) may produce more refined results than the present study. 3. Because group analysis of data often obscures individual trends, it would seem important in future research to focus more on the individual case than was done in the present study. Tracing the reactions of just a few selected men to the prison environment over a period of time, as assessed by depth interviews as well as various psychological instruments, might prove a valuable comple- ment to the type of research represented by this study. A. The MMPI was the only measuring instrument used in the current study; perhaps other psychological tests could be developed which are even more sensitive to changes in personality adjustment. 5. Research designed to develop methods to predict prison adjustment would be invaluable. If reasonably accurate predictions of prison adjustment could be made, prison personnel charged with the rehabilitation of the inmates could develop particular programs suited to partic- ular inmates. 6. Future research would do well to incorporate the time variable, since the comparison of initial and retest scores gives a quite different picture from that obtained through the further analysis of'the sub-groups. BIBLIOGRAPHY l. Arntzen, Fredrick I., "Psychological Observations of Prisoner's of War", American Journal of P8 chiatr , Vol. 10h. January, 19 , pp. - . 2. Barnes, Harry E. and Testers, K., New “Horizons in Criminology, New York: Prentice - , . 3. Cazeneuve, J., LaPs chologie du risonnier de erre (Psychology of the Prisoner of War), Paris: hhesses Universitaries de France, l94h. A. Chenault, Price and Jennings, George, Institutional and Parole Problems of Inmates, New Yerh: §ing hing School of Phinting, New Yorh §tate Department of Cor- rection, l9h5. 5. Clemmer, Donald, The Prison Communit , New York: The ChristoPher Publishing House, IghU. 6. Clemmer, Donald, "Observations of Imprisonment as a Source of Criminality”, Journal of Criminal Law, Crimp inolo and Political-Science, VoI. II, No. 3, Septem- er - cto er, , pp. -3l9. 7. Edwards, Allen L., E erimental Desi n'in Ps cholo i- cal Research, New YorE: Rhinehart and Company, I9§U. 8. Gill, Ian G., An Investigation of the Psychological Effects of the First Three Menths oTFImprisonment on the Personalit of the First Uffende- unpublished_' MJ. thesis, University of North Carolina, 1952. 9. Gough, Harrison and mann, George, Chan es in.MMPI Pro- files Occurin in a Milit RehabilitationfiProggam, unpuhlished Manuscript, 15%. 10. Hathaway, Starke R. and McKinlefi, J .C. , Minnesota Mult- ifihasic Personality Inventory, anual, New YorE: Psy- c o og ca orporatIOn, 1951. ll. Jacobson, Edith, "Observations on the Psychological Effects of Imprisonment on Female Political Prisoner33", Search-11 hts on Delin uenc : New Ps choanal tic Stud~ ies, Eissher, K.R., editor, New YorE: InternationZI Universities Press, 19h9. 13k- 12. Martin, John B. Break DoWn the Walls, New York: Ball- antine Books, 195A. 13. Mbehl, Paul E., Profile Analysis of the MMPI in Diff- erential Diagnosis", Journal of A lied Ps cholo Vbl. 30, No. 5, October, I9h5, pp. 5I7-52h. 1A. Paterson, Alexander, The Prison Problem of America, Hillside, New Jersey: Baker andTaylor, . 15. Reckless, Walter C., The Crime Problem, New York: Appleton - Century - Crhfts, Inc., I955. 16. Smith Robert E., Personality Conf irurations of Adult Male Penal Populations as revealehihy the MMPI, Un- published—doctorai thesis,University of Him esota, 955 17. welsh, George s. and Dahlstrom, w.c., Basic Readings on the MMPI in P3 cholo and Medicine, nneapo University of Minnesota Phase, I956. References Consulted Edwards, Allen L., Statistical Anal Sis, New York: Rhinehart and Company, Inc., l9h6. Garrett, Henry E., Statistics in Psycholo and Ed- ucation, New Yerk: Ibngmans, Gheen and 50., I957. Hathaway, Starks R., and Neehl, Paul E., An Atlas far the Clinical Use of the MMPI, Minneapolis: The Uni- versity of Minnesota Phase, 1951. APPENDIX A m1 RAW SCORES FOR THE TOTAL SAMPLE OF 185 FIRST PRISON OFFENDERS ON THE INITIAL TEST AND THE RETEST 136 MMPI.RAW SCORES FOR THE TOTAL SAMPLE OF 185 FIRST ERISON OFFENDERS ON THE INITIAL TEST AND THE RETEST* Group Enterigg_Prisqn_February, 1956 K Hs D Hy Pd Mf’Pa“Pt Sc MaS'i 12 23 ‘27 3o 31 21 19 28 31 20 56 17 11 16 20 26. 19, 15 21. 23 13 . 23 18 11 11 19 30 23 7 27 29 26 1 22 15 18 27 31 6 25 28 18 18' 25 15 15 18 20 22 28 9 22 20 21 31 23 19 20 23 27 1 10 26 26 18 21 18 16- 22 26 31 2h 7 30, 27 25 17 17 1h 23 25 30 25 11 26 28 27 20 12 9 11 18 26 25 10 22 28 32 15 1h 8 16 18 25 20 6 22 27 12 27 13 9 20 17 26 16 11 19 3g 24 19’ 3h H l4\n aaoxze4r A>G>\a~J\m(h t-Oxxnuo our hau>\»+4 q: 19 11 1h 22 22 23 13 23 22 15 11 1h 20 23 26 29 12 31 25 15 15 12 12 2O 27 24 9 26 22 21 11 13 21 25 29 27 21 14 30 2h 22 33 13 8 2h 19 26 25 7 22 l9 16 25 21 22 27 18 34 20 12 31 27 20 22 21 11 2h 18 22 21 8 2h 23 18 22 21 22 Zh ' 25 32 20 17 31 39 2h 29 28 15 24 23 34 17 10, 32 29 25 21 «It-4 \Im max v.4:- NH 4:4:- mw.-Pw ow: wk tow Ir' find 7 12 19 21 26 26 9 2h 21 21 27 23 16- 1h 24 27 22 7 25 26 21 16 - 9 12 25 16 35 20 15 35 25 17 #3 6 20 1h 22 18 32 18 ll 29 26 16 23 - 18 13 21 21 27 24 5 2h 23 25 18 9 25 13 20 24 26 22 9 30 30 16' 17 - 11 12 16 16 18 19 5 15 12 14 17 7 ll. 9 l7 17 15 18 5 17 17 13 16> * The retest score is written below the initial score for each man; for example, the first subject in the February group initially obtained a 3 L-score, an 11 F-score, a 12 K-score, etc., while on the retest, this man obtained scores of 2, 3, 17, etc., on these scales. K corrections have been added to the Hs, Pd, Pt, Sc, and Ma scores. 137 MMPI RAW SCORES CONTINUED t" '11 hh‘ hm“ ‘4..."‘A‘ -_.___ VVV—"‘ ___ v ___ Group Entering Prison March, 1956 v vfif—w w —— v-v HON MOI-4 W0 «PP U14" W .... [.1 000 mu mu: Hm oeox {>16 VH0 own 0602 mm‘ #44 \nm NM row 5...: KHSDHdeMf'PaPtSc Ma-Si ‘13 8 21 19 23 23 18 16 18' 21.. 18 9 22 20; 25 21 26 23 18 26 7 8 15 9 15 15 18 22 8 16 17 17 24 20 10 14 22 21 25 8 20 21 19 19' 7 O 13 8. 20 15 30 20 20 19 17' 16 20 10 20 24 3O 21 1 25 24 l8 17 15 17 19 23 28 19 7 32 24 28 23 18 17 20) 17 23 23 13 35 39 29 24 11 13 21 25 31 23 12 30 34 23 23 14 9' 19 20 29 25 6 25 25 23 192 2 19 23 28 31 25 12 32 34 25 21 2 22 27 29 32 3O 19 32 42 20 23 7 9 24 1622 30 14 23 22 19 38‘: 6 13 21 19 18 23 10 17 14 16. 17 21 ll 19 21 22 35 12 25 22 19 19: 2O 19 25 31 28 33 12 29 24 20 20) 12 11 17 17 25 25 15 30 30 27 24 13 13 25 17 29 24 10 23 24 18 25 22 23 20 30 36 28 15 30 40 20- 35 22 15 17 18 30 17 ' 8 30 31 17 32 MMPI RAWTSCORES CONTINUED —— ”v ‘4‘ - ‘wV‘v—ww V'v“ 138 w———————~ v—T Group Entering Prison April, 1956 L F K. as ‘n 4 3 6 12 10 '26 3 2 17 10 13 3 2 16~ 10 19 5 4 21 12 21 6 3 13 14 2o 6 1 16 13 16 10 10 18 14 26 4 6 18 15 22 5 7 18 15 22 9 3 24 12 21 3 o 22 13 17 4 0 23 12 13 10 6 19 25 25 10 2 17 26 25 7 12 18 24 26 7 8 12 12 28 g 7 12 31 35 3 17 16 20 l 3 13 14 26 2 2 14 13 24 5 2 20 21 22 6 o 20 18 21 2 9 16 2o 27 7 8 18 22 28 6 1 19 22 23 4 1 23 16 18 6 4 13 16; 3o 3 7 7 13 24 .Hy ‘im . 17 17 14 22 19 20 17 21 23 22 21 17 30 26 28 16 21 37 17 16 22 ‘ 23 3O 30 27 22 28 25 Pd 20 24 22 30 25 22 27 21 24 27 24 24 27 24 31 30 33 33 28 25 31 29 35 36 26 32 28 24 us: ' 20 17 27 22 22 20 24 23 27 25 14 17 25 22 33 23 22 24 25 l7 17 26 31 25 20 25 27 ___ _ Ikzv Sm, ma. Si 12 2 27 21 27 8 26 25 30 18: 12 23 22 18 21 14 27 28. 16 22 10 24 24 25 32 5 22 27 21 28. 15 25 32 19 24 9 24 30 19 27 14 28 27 23 18 12 31 28 23 18 3 27 27 14 23 11 25 25 15 23 14 29 29 21 29 15 22 26 14 25 12 37 47 20 28 13 26 25 15 35 12 39 39 27 34 9 25 26 23 29:- 5 23 21 21 23 7 22 23 20 25 7 23 24 18 22 10 21 24 22 23 15 33 34 27 25 16 37 39 29 24 10 22 23 16 24 11 26 27 15 23 14 35 30 14 39' 17 33 29 19 47 12a MMPI RAW SCORES CONTINUED I.‘ m"-— -— - "—.".".' H. d h m- 139 ~‘*' *-.-~—1OO"'._——1 Group EnteringfiPrisonImay,iyzgé Pd Mf Pa Pt aw ‘~‘_ Vfivv'm--—u‘—.-Oavum. L F K HS D I Hy 1 4 12 11 21 17 2 3 15 10: 21 17 6 8 15 1% 25 23 7 5 16 1 23 23 6 8 11 14 26 22 5 7 ll 13 24 25 g 9 17' 12 23 22 8 21 14 21 19 2 4 17 12 15 20 4 1 14 9 16 15 5 12 7 12. 41 24 2 4 11 1 3o 25 2 11 11 26 28 25 3 12 10 24 27 29 6 4 12 11 20 24 3 2 15 12 20 20 6 9 15 12 24 25 5 4 15 15 17 29 2 7 12 18 23 27 o 11 12 21 26 25 4 6 17 21 21 26 4 2 25 15 17 24 o g 4 4 24 10 5 5 5 23 14 4 10 9 21 21 26 5 4 19 14 15 20 7 4 16 18 22 25 7 5 19 16 18 2o 5 11 14 14 20 13 4 7. 13 15 20 16 3O 29 34 31 28 23 32 32 34 31 26 26 25 25 31 3O 25 18 30 33 32 22 20 22 29 38 26 23 23 23 27 22 32 27 27 25 26 26 25 18 26 29 25 2.1 31 27 25 24 21 31 16 20 15 17 26 17 22 22 25 21 15 10 12‘ ll 14 17 9 11 17 9 14 12 17 14 10 8 13 8 14 ll 9 12 10 8 20 6 9 5 4 12 26 25 35 35 26 28 25 28 29 24 43 33 40 3O 25 31 25 27 34 38 25 26 26 26 33 25 21 22 26 27 Se Ma 31 ”—- ----n'm 23 31 3O 28 32 25 33 34 2O 36 29 42 29 20 23 34 30 32 32 28 28 16 18 42 30 19 20 23 26 24 19 19; 17 20 18 25 19 21 23 16 16 26 21 22 20 22 22 21 17 22 24 16 20 3O 23 17 14 22 28 22 26 28 36 31 41 31 31 18 21 55 49? 36 30> 17 19 30: 31 39 37 20 14 43 37 31 23 25 23 28 30, 1402 MMPI RAW SCORES CONTINUED ““""€‘— v v-—_.-‘" 'r‘n—fi-H .rnndwwfw‘mwawmm -'- --‘W'M ‘J’HJ—‘Jd—HH Mm “w' a... Group“ Entering Prison Junej 1956 KHs‘D Hy PdepaPtSc MaSEI: __.-u—1 04> \nn mp- pm flu) NF“ If" H WW WW -P'-P‘ CON) 4-‘\) \10\ W0 VON H'P' \10\ {PM ...: MN Hm wx} mm vol-4 mm Max) Wm «PHI-*- l—‘N I—Ixn mo NW mm wvx wax Wm 91:! 13 17 29 22 32 26 9 36 '27 18' 34 14 13 25 21 25 22 11 31 18 17 31 14 13 24 25 27 29 12 36 3o 15 33 14 9 10 13 19 18 9 18 17 12 24 12 18 22 28 28 19 10 23 2 22 3o 19 19 19 30 31 2o 15 ’37 3 29 27 11 9 18 13 28 26 9 28 28 16 43 8 10 2o 8 3o 25 13 28 26 15 41 15 19 20 21 3o 15 9 29 28 20 3o 16 16 18 15 27 19 14 33 32 21 39 9 23 22 28 29 31 19 32 3 21 33 20 11 15 15 28 18 5 29 2 16 28 9 8 21 14 21 23 6 25 29 27 281 17 12 20 17 29 15 8 24 20 21 19 18 22 20 33 22 25 8 24 24 17 24 21 19 22 28 27 23 10 24 25 18 17 15 14 27 18 35 26 9 2 24 24 26 19 14 23 16 28 23 8 2 25 23 23 1 11 22 17 29 23 8 26 21 21 27 1 - 10 16 16 24 22 10 21 25 20 35 13 11 21 17 29 26 10 24 29 21 26 16 15 21 21 24 25 11 21 24 23 201 13 12 28 16 23 15 12 24 18 6 36 18 17 29 14 24 20 12 27 23 13 41 23 13 18 21 23 23 6 25 24 16 22 24 15 21 24 29 26 9 29 27 15 21 25 23 21 26 29 28 15 34 39 27 25 24 22 21 31 25 23 13 3o 31 18 23 10 7 18 13 28 15 6 14 26 27 21 19 10 18 10 30 12 10 24 27 21 20 16 15 15 26 23 27 9 23 20 26 13 16 12 12 21 27 26 7 20 20 22 10 11 7 18 13 21 21 7 19 17 15 26 15 10 16 9 22 2o 3 24 19 23 23 MMPI RAW SCORES CONTINUED Group Enterigg PriSon 'July, 1956 1. F K AH‘s D Hy Pd Mr Pa Pl: Sc Ma 85 ‘6 12 16" 18 '34 3o 30' 32‘ 12 42 37 16 3'6 6 4 16 20 29 32 28 33 13 42 31 17 39- g 2 15 12 27 18 26 23 12 25 21 15 34 2 21 13 21 2o 32 31 11 25 23 13 31 7 8 14 18 27 24 29 20 6 29 27 20 3o 5 7 17 17 22 25 32 24 6 28 28 20 31 9 3 24 17 20 26 31 22 13 25 28 22 16 9 4 21 17 18: 24 29 23 15 23 25 19 17 7 2 23 15 21 27 31 27 11 26 28 22 20 6 o 21 12 19 24 28 28 9 23 22 20 26 2 3 12 14 18 17 25 26 15 25 27 24 22 5 3 l5 14 21 24 25 25 7 24 19 13 27 5 3 13 17 21 20 28 21 8 24 19 22 23 4 4 17 23 21 20 32 20 - 1o 27 28 23 38: g 3 19 17 16 25 29 21 12 23 31 18 27 o 201 12 13 2o 24 26 11 22 36 16 27 3 12 9 18 23 26 29 28 21 35 42 22 38 4 11 8 8 25 19 24 26 15 3o 46 18 37 6 10 7 18 33 22 31 42 16 35 33 19 44 8 4 9 11 24 16 23 36 12 27 23 12 39 2 8 7 6 17 8 21 23 11 26 26 18 42 1 9 14 12 18 19 25 19 12 33 36 24 35 3 2 20 11 16 22 28 35 11 25 23 19 17 2 4 19 12 25 26 39 29 14 29 23 15 27 6 5 12 11 16 16 23 32 9 28 26 18: 39 6 5 15 1o 14 19 2 29 13 22 22 18 22 5 11 15 15 29 23 34 19 5 3o 31 17 36 6 8 7 18 30 29 35 22 7 30 27 19 36- 6 5 13 16 16 21 26 31 11 25 25 29 22 8 2 14 9 16 18 27 27 13 27 27 34 24 WI RAW SCORES CONTINUED 142 'Grogp E1111 8121.355. Pri sdn Alig'ust.J '19 56 ' L F K gs“ D Hy 'Pd Mf Pa Pt Sc Ma Si 16 3' 2b 2 '34 "34 ' 26" 21 9 3o 2 ' '15 '27 8 3 23 1 27 27 26 19 8 29 2 14 28- 5 4 16 9 22 15 25 24 5 23 22 17 26> 4 2 25 13 20 21 28 23 8 2 29 15 18 3 12 16 15 22 22 27 24 13 32 41 19 22 4 6 19 13 18 21 29 25 12 31 30 23 20 8 4 21 13 25 18 26 24 10 26 2 17 29 6 1 24 13 24 23 31 26 11 27 2 17 24 1o 11 13 22 23 29 29 26 1o 26 28 18 33 8 12 22 25 27 3o 36 26 12 34 35 18 29 4 o 18 11 17 21 17 21 8 20 21 14 19 4 o 17 9 16 21 22 21 5 20 18 19 18 3 7 15 10 21 24 38 26 11 25 24 27 17 5 2 17 9 17 20 3o 26 5 21 21 22 17 3 2 20 11 19 18 31 21 10 24 2 17 18 8 3 26 14 14 23 29 18 12 28 2 17 16 4 3 17 16 19 2 26 23 13 34 3o 26 20 4 1 13 8 16 1 19 23 9 22 16 22 23 7 9 12 13 29 17 25 25 12 28 31 21 28 8 7 22 17 22 27 35 25 12 25 32 21 18. 1 4 1 9 22 19 24 16 13 27 20 19 28 3 2 1 14 21 24 26 21 26 22 17 29 8 3 14 14 23 16 25 26 1o 22 21 20 23 3 5 21 15 2o 17 29 26 11 28 31 24 19 2 12 7 9 21 11 21 28 14 22 22 16 27 2 10 12 9 20 16 25 23 12 29 28 20 26- 3 9 10 11 33 19 25 23 6 33 33 24 39 3 8 12 13 21 22 22 20 12 25 21 25 32 7 6 13 14 28 17 21 18 10 23 21 11 32 7 5 14 11 22 18 28 19 12 28 3o 20 35 7 8 17 28 36 32 32 27 13 42 36 15 47 9 7 15 23 35 28 22 23 12 34 25 16 46 MMPI RAW SCORES CONTINUED 143 ' Group Entering Prison September, 1956 L E" K Hs ”D“ Hyk Pd Mf A Pt Sc Ma Si '5 6 19 16 27 23 32 15 9 3o 28 17 35 3 6 20 15 25 19 29 17 8 3o 27 17 38: 4 3 15 12 23 18 27 23 2 3o 27 18 22 4 2 22 17 21 21 32 31 29 32 20 18 1 2 15 16 3o 25 42 25 17 33 34 32 15 6 4 22 16 15 22 35 23 10 24 28 23 18- 3 5 9 7 24 19 35 23 13 35 32 19 40 5 5 7 5 19 11 28 27 6 17 15 20 3o 3 4 21 15 l9 22 34 23 10 34 34» 21 24 5 1 17 14 17 21 32 24 8 27 27 26, 14 3 7 13 24 3 23 33 24 11 31 29 27 34 4 3 22 21 1 26 26 25 7 3o 26 20 22 2 5 10* 6 17 14 29 21 8 21 17 22 16 3 3 13 8 15 15 29 20 1o 18 19 21 16 6 3 11 8 15 16 26 17 14 26 20 15 29 6 4 15 9 19 20 29 20; 17 27 23 15 33 3 6 11 9 24 13 21 24 11 27 24 24 29 8 3 21 11 19 17 25 17 10 27 29 29 18 1 5 8‘ 15 25 22 24 3o 12 37 26 14 32 2 3 11 7 15 13 18 24 10 24 19 13 32 MMPI HEW SCORES CONTINUED Groug Enteging Prison October, 1226 LFKHSDHdeMfPaPt Si 11181131131253311 11 911812131113111115 1 11131311311213 3'13 1 1111 1421 13 13111111 201? 1212142U232928193£ 13 3%111316131811113 11 25813191313211? 221% 3 112 1135 31 11 11 11 3? 3.2 8 2 23 16 24 25 28 21 12. 27 22 10 4 28 17 2 29 32 23 12. 31 18 191113111111111112 if 11-131211123131213 25 18313113116311213 1 312311311321151353 1? 1.1311316121319311 11 11225113221111.1216? 14 21111181113131? 13 1? 11 12.121111111521312 ‘42 1.111111181811181 1% 11.113613111111211 143 1.9111131113111124 1‘7” 31131113131333311 3 12121181311313 224 3M5 MMPI BEN" SCORE CONTINUED Groug EnteriniPrison November; 1256 I. F K Ha I) Hy Pd Mf Pa Pt 86 Ma 31 1 1 1 2 2 1 8 22 2 2 1 g 1% 13 16 3; 23 1? 15. 23 22. 2 1 ‘ 11 10 22 12 2 22 1 2. 21 2 16111321123193211‘5’1823 6 22 22 29 28 3 2 1'1. 36 30 1 36 7" g 26) 22 23 31+ 3; 22 13 35 39 2 29 1 10 10 16 1 20 2 10 2 1 28 i 1 17 10 18 18 23 23 9 2‘5 18 1 21.. 15+ 11 9 19 2'27 22 29 25 15 35 30 18 1.1 3 5 14 20 25 25 30 20 11+ 36 32 l9 #3 8 A. 21 21 22 26 38 20 11 31 29 27 22 8 A; 17 18 25 27 28 21; 9 25 22 21 20 5 8 20 19 21 23 27 21 11 26 31 19 2? ti, 2 19 16 18 23 28 16 8 26 26 18 23. 2 7 1h. 13, 25 25 32 28 7 3151» 25 26 29 9' O 22 12 20 22 31 26 10 30 31 21 2k, 1 A; 9 17 21 20 28 .32 13 27 3A. 28 36 2 A. 12 17 20 26 27 11 25 25 21 37 5 1h 17 22 29 3.2 3.1 22 7 28 23 15 36- 8 2 16 19 25 314'... 27 22' 8 2h. 23 18 27 5 1.. 16 13. 22 21.. 20 22 9- 20 22 17 27 6 A. 20 12 21.,» 29 26 22 9 28 25. 11:. 27 ii.» 7 135 l7 29 26 311+ 39 17 35 30 20 37 6 6.. 18 15 22 20 30 33 12 26 27 16 28 3' 1 17 11.. 18, 17 2A,. 28 5 2A. 25 22 20 2 1. 21 13 18 18 22. 27 6, 21 25 21 13 6 A. 19 19 23 25 31 22 13 29 2A. 16 3.1 5 6; 19 15. 25 21 31 17 9 29 24 17 28 6 6 10 17 30 21 25 20 8. 30 31 18 56 8 9 11 19 28 23 2A. 25 11 25 28 18 51.. 9 h. 18 19 27 22 29 17 11.. 3:1 29 20 39 6 5 16 18 25 18 2,6 23 8 26 22 16 27 l 13,- 11 18 26 21 2A. 20 9 30 40 29 30 3 12 8' 16 25 19 22 25 1A. 27 34 26 3A. 11 22 20 1 20 28 18. 8 O 20 15.1 3 1h. 19 21 28 28 29 26 11 328 a? 20 3O 2 2 2 O 2 1 82218111317281112121 MMPI RAW SCORES CONTINUED Group Entera‘gg Prison December; 1956 1. 1? K as 11 my Pd) 1:: Pa Pt; Sc Ma 81 5 6. 11. 8. 17 17 21 21 9 21, 21 17 23 6 7 21 17 21 21“ 35 20 10 29 51 18 20 6. 1. 18 11 21 18 23; 26 10 25 21 16 57 6 7‘ 12- 21 36 29 31 23 15 39 33 16 [b9 1. 2 11. 21 27 26 27 21 8 3o 25 21 31 3 5 11 16 22. 19 20 25 13 29 25 25 55' 5 o 18 21 21 32 22 20 8 26 20 11. ‘50 6 5 21 22 25 52 23. 21. 9 5o 21 18 51 7 7 20 15 22; 18 22 21 15 22 25 13 33 7 2: 21 13 22 15 20 25 9 27 25 11, 51 5 o 11 10 18 22 25 28. 8 22 16 20 15 8; o 23 15 21 21 56 5o 12; 29 27 15 20 3 11 5 9 25 16 25 18 12 28 5o 26 51 7 9 12 11 25 20 21 18 9 25 26 19 56 35 5 111-.- 9 19 111+, 33 21 11 32 30 27 23 5 1 11 8 15 .11 31 19 8 26 27 29 21 6 6 22 20 28 25 32 17 8 30 29 11+ 28 10 2: 26 20 26 25 29 15 8 5o 50 15 26 1 3 16 15 22 23 28 17 7 35 37 5o 26 2 3 16 12 19 19 26 17 7 21, 28 26 22 5 5 22 12 18 25, 25 25 10 28. 26. 21 11 6 1 25 13 18 21 26 22 11 27 25 13 13 7 6 18 15 25 22, 20 25 8 28 23 16 3o 10 6 19 15 18 21 21 27 7 25 25 13 22 5 3. 17 20 20 3o 31 25 10 26 27 22 20 5 1 25 21 18 35 31 22 12 29 3o 22 5 o 15 13 20 21 31 51 7 22 21 21 21 6 1 22: 15 21 25 26 27 13 25 27 17 15 M7 MMPI RAW SCORES. CONTINUED Group Entering Prison Januaryl 1957 I. F K H8 11 By Pd- 11: Pa P6 Se Ma 31 2 2 16 11. 15 21 23, 25 7 23 22 20 22 5 5 21 19 20 25 32 26 12 27 29 21 27 5 5 16 11 17 22 27 21 8 20 18 18 13 2: 3 20 10 15 19 23 22 7 23. 23 20 13 3 10 8 17 26 19 29 15 15 27 3o 22 35 10 10 26 29 311 31+ 36 l9 13 311. £11 21 35 5 18 13 21 19 32 20 11. 51 29 3o, 2 5 2’ 18 16 20 28 29 18 11 33 32 22. 2; 10 10 1o 18. 21 19 26 21 13 27 21 12 58 9 11. 10 18 2o 27 28 21 15 27 22 20 21 2 12 7' 13 19 21 25 27 13 25 26. 25 29 5 5, 15 15 11 22. 23 20 12 21. 21 21 26 1 9 15 20 21 27 26 26 8 3o .31 26 19 1 3, 12: 15 21 21. 31 29 8; 29 19 23 25 3 ’Z 9 18 30 23 26 25, 10 3.1 28, 18. 15 7 5 11. 20 23 16 21 23 11 29 21 21 1o 2 12 7 25, 37‘ 3.6 21 31 15 19. 12 23 57 1 12. 7 31 11 3'9 21 21 15 18 13 23 56 .9 5 16 22 28 21. 29 26 13 36, 26 17 17 9 7' 16 20 3o. 23 27 27 8 27 23 16 13 ' 1 1o 17 ' 17 20 18 1o 22 20 13 26 ‘5'? 2 18 9 19 18 21 21 10 26 23 13 29 2 8 it» 15 22 28 311 28 19 33 333 2-7 30 5 2. 19 13 21 26 51. 29 13 29 21. 19 19 1. 3. 13 11 19 25 25 21 ll 27 18 32 5 1. 22 15 20 23. 26 25 13 31 28' 20 26 5 1 15 10 20 16 26 27 9 28 29 22 28 9 6 15 10 15 13 23 19 7 22. 23 22 27 6 3 19 11 15 16 28 22 5. 22. 23 23 22 1. 1 20 11. 19 19 30 20 7 23 25 16 22 5 11. 18 20 29 52 31, 35 15 36 35 26 21 5 9 20 20 29 31+ 37 33 16 #0 38 232 3!; .' , 1 11 21 2. 2 1 20 2) 22 11 2.1811221312112181» , 2 o . 22 2 Z 11 19 17' it 2? 23 3 37 21 §3 11— APPENDIX B CRITICAL RATIO CONTARISONS OF EACH MONTHLY GROUP WITH EVERY OTHER MONTHLY GROUP FOR THOSE ANALYSES 0F VARIANCE WHICH IIELDED SIGNIFICANT F'S: RETESTIMF SCORES, RETEST SI SCORES, K CHANGE SCORES, D CHANCE, SCORES,INTERNALIZATION RATIO CHANCE SCORES 1&9 CRITICAL RATIO COMPARISONS OF EACH NbHTHLI GROUP WITH EVERY OTHER.NONTHLI GROUP FOR THOSE ANALYSES 0F VARI- ANCE WHICH IIELDED SIGNIFICANT F'S: RETEST MF SCORES, RETEST SI SCORES, K CHANGE SCORES, D CHANGE SCORES, INTERNALIZATION RATIo-GHANGE SCORES;; ';- ~ - Retest M1 Scores 30E. 80E. GC# Dif. dif.‘ "t" ' GC#‘ Dif. ‘dif.’ "t" 1-2 10661 101.58 1012 11.-8 20955 1036 2017* 1-3 0681 10‘0 "" 1*.9 0821 1.1459 "" 1-h .010 1.38 -- h-lO 1.385 1.51 ~- 1.5 09h5 1060 -" “-11 02 1075 .. 1-6 10 19‘? lo 19 "' 11.-12 207h2 1026 2 o 18* 1'7 20589 1055 1067 5-6 021.59 10416 ’. 1-9 0811 101’s -" 5-8 20000 10 59 1.26 1-10 10375 10 50 "" 5.9 013‘? 1070 "" 1-11 .256 1.73 -- 5-10 .130 1.72 -- 1-12 2.732 1.21 2.20* 5-11 1.201 1.93 ~- 2-3 0980 lo 52 --‘ 5-12 1.787 10 50 1.19 2“} l o 671 l o 50 1 o 11 6'7 3 o 783 1 0 #0 2 o 70“ 2-5 0716 1.71 -" 6'8 10751 1017 10 50 2.6 oil-67 1033 ‘"" 6-9 0383 1.32 -- 2-7 h.250 1.66 2.56* 6-10 .181 1.35 -- 2-8 1.281 1.15 -- 6-11 1.150 1.60 -- 2-9 0850 1059 "’"' 6.12 1.538 1.05 10 7 2-10 .286 1 .60 "' 7’8 5 O 534‘ 10 53 3 O 2** 2-11 1.917 1.83 1.05 7-9 3.100 1.65 2.06* 3-1 .691 1.11 -- 7-11 2.333 1.88 1.21 3’5 026‘} 1.63 "" 7.1.2 5.321 10“? 3 070** 3.6 0513 1023 -- 8'9 2013‘} 10"6 lohé 3-7 3.370 1.22 2.76** 8-10 1.570 1.18 1.06 3.9 0130 1.51 """ 8'12 1.213 1022 II- 3'10 069A 1053 " 9'10 056‘ 1.60 -- 3.11 0937 1076 "" 9'11 10067 1082 ." 3-12 2.05]. 1.28 1060 9’12 10921 1036 10“ 4-5 .955 1.62 -- 10-11 1.631 1.8h -- h‘6 1.201 1.21 -- 10-12 10357 1039 -’ 1-7 2.579 1.56 1.65 11-12 2.988 ..1.61 1.82. GC# Mbans Groups Compared Dif. S.E. dif. Retest Si Scores t 150 t 1.900 o5h7 3.657 2.975 2.736 2.255 1.612 2.255 1.400 5.h11 9.061 Zohh7 1.757 1.075 .836 h.155 .288 h-155 .500 3.511 7.141 h.20h 3.522 3.283 1.708 2.159 1.708 .500 .511 7.1h1 .682 .921 5.912 O O um. m4" HOOWOW O\\O Hw 0‘? N \IH QOM’UIPHWO‘O WOW“) mgmoow O NO‘NQWQ Hfirmng OO‘G NW4 0‘ N N N N N tow»: N NW N wwwwwwwwww wwwwwwwwwww O . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O NVHOWVI 1.19 2.99#* 2:39* h-B h-9 h-lo h-ll h-lz 5-6 5-7 5-8 5-9 5-10 5-11 5-12 6-7 6-8 6-9 6-10 6-11 6-12 7-8 7-9 7-10 7-11 7-12 8-9 8-10 8-11 8-12 9-10 9-11 9-12 10-11 h.011 10-12 7.6h1 11-12 00 HNNNNwNNN 0.0.0.... mwrmmwg mmmrwo HH 2.08* 2.09* 2.80** 1.72 1:30 2.17* 1.90 1.60 1.06 2.71* 1.h3 1.h1 3.h2** 5.59** 1.21 1.16 3.07:: 1.18 2.73** H.28** 1.62 3.35** 1.93 151 K Change Scores 85$. S.E. 00$ 01:. dif. t 00% Bit. air. 8 1-2 .015 1.87 -- 'h-8 .735 1.19 - 1-3 1.819 1. 57 1.159 4-9 .367 1.16 -- 1“]- l .056 1.83 "" h”lo lo 21‘} lo 27 ".- 1-5 .011 1.90 - 1-11 .100 1.11 -- 1-6 .007 1.68 -- h-12 2.663 1.43 1.835 1-7 2.556 1.66 1.539 5-6 .018 1 6 1-8 .321 1.63 -- 5- 2.5h5 1.66 1.533 1.9 1.1023 1.61 "" 5" 0310 1063 1'10 20270 1069 103A3 5.9 loll-12 1061 1-11 1.156 1.59 -- 5-10 2.259 1.69 1.337 1-12 1.587 1.82 -- 5-11 1.1h5 1.59 ~- 2-3 1.83b 1.56 1.191 5-12 1.598 1.82 -- 2-1 1. 071 1.50 -- 6-7 2.563 1.10 1.831 2-5 .026 1.87 "' 6.8 .328 1.36 2-6 .008 1.61 -- 6-9 1.130 1.31 1.067 2-7 2.571 1.62. 1.587 6-10 2.277 1.06 1.581 2'8 .362 1.59 "" 6.11 10163 1032 -- 2-9 1.038 1.57 -- 6-12 1.580 1.59 -- 2-10 2.285 1.66 1.377 7-8 2.235 1.31.. 1.668 2'11 10171 1.56 "" 7.9 1.133 1032 '- 2-12 10572 1079 "' 7'10 .286 lollnl "“"’ 3-# .763 1.11 -- 7-11 1.600 1.30 1.077 3-6 1.826 1.30 1.605 8—9 1.102 1.28 ~- 3-7 .737 1.27 -- 8.10 1.909 1.38 1.112 3-8 1.198 1.23 1.218 8-11 .835 1.26 ~- 3-9 .396 1.21 -- 8-12 1.908 1.5 1.230 340.w1 132 -- 940 37 L3 « 3.11 .663 1.19 -- 9-11 .2 7 1.2h ~- 3-12 3.106 1.18 2.301: 9-12 3.010 1.52 1.980 h‘s 10045 1054 "" 10-11 loll-ll- 1032‘? -6 1.06 1.25 -- 10-12 3.857 1. 60 2:- 1* 1-7 1.50% 1.22 1.229 11-12 2.713 1.50 1.829 n‘change‘seore. 152 S.E. S.E. Dif ~dif.- ~-t---- ec#- Dir ------ dif.~ -t- 0968 1.67 "" h-B 10‘“!- "'- .190 1.35 -- 1-9 1.38 - 1.189 2.13 2.107* 1911 1.59 2.321* 2.761 1.35 2.017* 1-12 1.67 -- 0589 1050 ’- 5'6 2.08 '- 1.621 1.11 1.152 5-7 2.19 1.735 10789 1035 10325 5'8 2013 1.298 2.532 1.56 1.623 5-9 2.09 1.211 1.711 1.56 1.097 5-10 2.23 -- .960 1.65 -- 5-11 2.23 2.959** .788 1.61 -- 5-12 2.29 1.197 209h8 1.71 1072‘} 6"? 104‘} 10510 5.357 2.32 2.309* 6-8 1.35 -- 30732 1063 2.28% 6-9 1.28 ""’ 1.575 1.76 -- 6-10 1.50 -- 2.757 1.61 1.681 6-12 1.59 1.135 30500 1.81 1093‘} 7'8 1050 -- .713 1.81 -- 7-9 1.11 ~- 2.170 1.38 1.572 7-11 1.61 1.102 1.597 2.09 2.199* 7-12 1.72 -- 2.951 1.28 2.308% 8-9 1.35 -- .779 1.76 -- 8-10 1.56 --. 10979 1029 10 5311' 8-12 1065 --' 2.722 1.51 10803 9-10 1051 -- 1. 521 1. 5‘1 -- 9-11 1. 51 2.318” 10150 1060 ""' 9.12 1060 lollp3 078‘} 1037 "" 10‘12 1078 "'- l.39l 1.53 -- 11-12. --1.78 - 1.501 Internalizat10n Ratio Change Scores 153 S.E. 00# Dif. dif. t t 1-2 .0136 .036 1.21 1.13 1-3 .0010 .032 -- -- 1-1 .0270 .011 -- -- 1-5 .0852 .016 1.85 2 .168 1-6 00785 .0110 1096 “'- 1-7 .0093 .033 -- -- 1-8 .0182 .033 -- 1 69 1.9 000% .037 "'"' 2030* 1-10 .0635 .019 1.30 1. 68 1-11 0061‘} 0035 1.75 -- 1-12 .0101 .035 -- 3 19** 2-1 .0706 .012 1.68 1 76 2-5- .1286 .017 2.71* 2 17* 2-6 .1217 .011 2.97** 1.75 2-7 .0529 .035 1.51 -- 2-8 .0256 .035 -- 3.h9** 2-9 o 0h82 o 039 l o 2‘} 2 0 21* 2-10 .1071 .050 2.11* -- 2-11 0 0178 o 036 '“" -- 2-12 .0335 .036 -- 1.13 3"? 00280 .039 -.- 2.1l’* 3-5 .0862 .011 1.96 1-15 3-6 .0791 .037 2.11: -- 3-7 .0103 .030 -- 1.19 3-8 .0172 .030 -- 1.31 3'10 '36:? '86; 1-35 1'15 3-11 .0601 .032 1.89 1.78 3 '12 o 0091 o 03 2 -- -- 1—5 .0582 .051 1.11 2~55* 1—6 .0511 .016 1.11 1.50 4-7 .0177 .010 -- . 1~h7 . . . . . . . p . , a a . . . o e o . . . 6 v t n o 9 . n . a . . u a a a A 3 - . . . . . . . . . . F a v p r . , - . . . 4 p A .. . A r . . . . .. . . . t u p . g y . p r r . 8 . . . ~ g u . _ u r . r r . r r . h 3 r . r . . n . ~ . . — . m . . h . . . r a I u a r . I r . v r r . . .. n r u n r n V O t n . . . _ _ 1 — , _ . . p u . p . p r . r . v c r o B o a a ... v llIllWllWIll!"WNWIHJIJJIVIIHHIHIJ”Willi/VI